Barium Chloride from India; Inv. No. 701-TA-678 and 731-TA-1584 (Preliminary)

=== USITC Institution and Scheduling === 2901Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2022 / Notices provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.8), as temporarily amended by 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 2020). Under that rule waiver, the Office of the Secretary will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https:// edis.usitc.gov). No in-person paper- based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding electronic filing should contact the Office of the Secretary, Docket Services Division (202–205– 1802), or consult the Commission’s Handbook on Filing Procedures. Definitions of types of documents that may be filed; Requirements: In addition to requests to appear at the hearing, this notice provides for the possible filing of four types of documents: Prehearing briefs, oral hearing statements, posthearing briefs, and other written submissions. (1) Prehearing briefs refers to written materials relevant to the investigation and submitted in advance of the hearing, and includes written views on matters that are the subject of the investigation, supporting materials, and any other written materials that you consider will help the Commission in understanding your views. You should file a prehearing brief particularly if you plan to testify at the hearing on behalf of an industry group, company, or other organization, and wish to provide detailed views or information that will support or supplement your testimony. (2) Oral hearing statements (testimony) refers to the actual oral statement that you intend to present at the hearing. Do not include any confidential business information in that statement. If you plan to testify, you must file a copy of your oral statement by the date specified in this notice. This statement will allow Commissioners to understand your position in advance of the hearing and will also assist the court reporter in preparing an accurate transcript of the hearing (e.g., names spelled correctly). (3) Posthearing briefs refers to submissions filed after the hearing by persons who appeared at the hearing. Such briefs: (a) Should be limited to matters that arose during the hearing, (b) should respond to any Commissioner and staff questions addressed to you at the hearing, (c) should clarify, amplify, or correct any statements you made at the hearing, and (d) may, at your option, address or rebut statements made by other participants in the hearing. (4) Other written submissions refer to any other written submissions that interested persons wish to make, regardless of whether they appeared at the hearing, and may include new information or updates of information previously provided. In accordance with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.8) the document must identify on its cover (1) the investigation number and title and the type of document filed (i.e., prehearing brief, oral statement of (name), posthearing brief, or written submission), (2) the name and signature of the person filing it, (3) the name of the organization that the submission is filed on behalf of, and (4) whether it contains confidential business information (CBI). If it contains CBI, it must comply with the marking and other requirements set out below in this notice relating to CBI. Submitters of written documents (other than oral hearing statements) are encouraged to include a short summary of their position or interest at the beginning of the document, and a table of contents when the document addresses multiple issues. Confidential business information: Any submissions that contain confidential business information must also conform to the requirements of section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules requires that the cover of the document and the individual pages be clearly marked as to whether they are the ‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘non-confidential’’ version, and that the confidential business information is clearly identified by means of brackets. All written submissions, except for confidential business information, will be made available for inspection by interested parties. As requested by the USTR, the Commission will not include any confidential business information in the report it sends to the USTR. However, all information, including confidential business information, submitted in this investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel for cybersecurity purposes. The Commission will not otherwise disclose any confidential business information in a way that would reveal the operations of the firm supplying the information. Summaries of written submissions: Persons wishing to have a summary of their position included in the report should include a summary with their written submission on or before May 17, 2022, and should mark the summary as having been provided for that purpose. The summary should be clearly marked as ‘‘summary for inclusion in the report’’ at the top of the page. The summary may not exceed 500 words and should not include any confidential business information. The summary will be published as provided if it meets these requirements and is germane to the subject matter of the investigation. The Commission will list the name of the organization furnishing the summary and will include a link to the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) where the written submission can be found. By order of the Commission. Issued: January 12, 2022. William Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer. [FR Doc. 2022–00912 Filed 1–18–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–678 and 731– TA–1584 (Preliminary)] Barium Chloride From India; Institution of Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations and Scheduling of Preliminary Phase Investigations AGENCY : United States International Trade Commission. ACTION : Notice. SUMMARY : The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of investigations and commencement of preliminary phase countervailing duty and antidumping duty investigation Nos. 701–TA–678 and 731–TA–1584 (Preliminary) pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports of barium chloride from India, provided for in subheading 2827.39.45 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Jan 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JAN1.SGM 19JAN1 jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1 2902 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2022 / Notices value and alleged to be subsidized by the Government of India. Unless the Department of Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’) extends the time for initiation, the Commission must reach a preliminary determination in countervailing duty and antidumping duty investigations in 45 days, or in this case by February 28, 2022. The Commission’s views must be transmitted to Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by March 7, 2022. DATES : January 12, 2022. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Alejandro Orozco (202–205–3177), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (https:// www.usitc.gov). The public record for these investigations may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background.—These investigations are being instituted, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)), in response to petitions filed on January 12, 2022, by Chemical Products Corporation, Cartersville, Georgia. For further information concerning the conduct of these investigations and rules of general application, consult the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207). Participation in the investigations and public service list.—Persons (other than petitioners) wishing to participate in the investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in §§ 201.11 and 207.10 of the Commission’s rules, not later than seven days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Industrial users and (if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level) representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission countervailing duty and antidumping duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to these investigations upon the expiration of the period for filing entries of appearance. Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list.—Pursuant to § 207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in these investigations available to authorized applicants representing interested parties (as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) who are parties to the investigations under the APO issued in the investigations, provided that the application is made not later than seven days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. Conference.—In light of the restrictions on access to the Commission building due to the COVID–19 pandemic, the Commission is conducting the staff conference through video conferencing on February 2, 2022. Requests to appear at the conference should be emailed to preliminaryconferences@usitc.gov (DO NOT FILE ON EDIS) on or before January 31, 2022. Please provide an email address for each conference participant in the email. Information on conference procedures will be provided separately and guidance on joining the video conference will be available on the Commission’s Daily Calendar. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission’s deliberations may request permission to participate by submitting a short statement. Please note the Secretary’s Office will accept only electronic filings during this time. Filings must be made through the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https:// edis.usitc.gov). No in-person paper- based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Written submissions.—As provided in §§ 201.8 and 207.15 of the Commission’s rules, any person may submit to the Commission on or before February 7, 2022, a written brief containing information and arguments pertinent to the subject matter of the investigations. Parties shall file written testimony and supplementary material in connection with their presentation at the conference no later than noon on February 1, 2022. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of § 201.8 of the Commission’s rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s rules. The Commission’s Handbook on Filing Procedures, available on the Commission’s website at https:// www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_ on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates upon the Commission’s procedures with respect to filings. In accordance with §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Certification.—Pursuant to § 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, any person submitting information to the Commission in connection with these investigations must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the best of the submitter’s knowledge. In making the certification, the submitter will acknowledge that any information that it submits to the Commission during these investigations may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of these or related investigations or reviews, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements. Authority: These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.12 of the Commission’s rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: January 12, 2022. William Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer. [FR Doc. 2022–00911 Filed 1–18–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public Interest AGENCY : U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION : Notice. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Jan 18, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JAN1.SGM 19JAN1 jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1 ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === USITC Determination – Preliminary === 12486 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2022 / Notices 1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 87 FR 7094 and 87 FR 7100 (February 8, 2022). for which the RAC is organized; represent interests associated with transportation or rights-of-way; represent developed outdoor recreation, off-highway vehicle users, or commercial recreation activities; represent the commercial timber industry; or represent energy and mineral development. Category Two—Representatives of nationally or regionally recognized environmental organizations; dispersed recreational activities; archaeological and historical interests; or nationally or regionally recognized wild horse and burro interest groups. Category Three—Hold state, county, or local elected office; are employed by a state agency responsible for the management of natural resources, land, or water; represent Indian tribes within or adjacent to the area for which the RAC is organized; are employed as academicians in natural resource management or the natural sciences; or represent the affected public at large. Individuals may nominate themselves or others. This is an additional call for nominations. If you have already applied in 2020 or 2021, and your nomination is still being considered, you do not need to reapply. Nominees must be residents of the State of New Mexico. The BLM will evaluate nominees based on their education, training, experience, and knowledge of the geographic area of the RAC. Nominees should demonstrate a commitment to collaborative resource decision-making. The following must accompany all nominations: —A completed RAC application, which can either be obtained through your local BLM office or online at: https:// www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/ 1120-019_0.pdf —Letters of reference from represented interests or organizations; and —Any other information that addresses the nominee’s qualifications. Simultaneous with this notice, the BLM will issue press releases providing additional information for submitting nominations. Nominations and completed applications for RACs should be sent to the appropriate BLM offices listed below: New Mexico Northern New Mexico RAC Jillian Aragon, BLM Farmington Field Office, 6251 College Boulevard, Suite A, Farmington, NM 87402; Phone: (505) 564–7722. Southern New Mexico RAC William Wight, BLM Las Cruces District Office, 1800 Marquess Street, Las Cruces, NM 88005; Phone: (575) 525–4444. (Authority: 43 CFR 1784.4–1) Melanie G. Barnes, Acting New Mexico State Director. [FR Doc. 2022–04606 Filed 3–3–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–FB–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–678 and 731– TA–1584 (Preliminary)] Barium Chloride From India; Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of barium chloride from India, provided for in subheading 2827.39.45 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) and to be subsidized by the government of India. 2 Commencement of Final Phase Investigations Pursuant to section 207.18 of the Commission’s rules, the Commission also gives notice of the commencement of the final phase of its investigations. The Commission will issue a final phase notice of scheduling, which will be published in the Federal Register as provided in § 207.21 of the Commission’s rules, upon notice from the U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’) of affirmative preliminary determinations in the investigations under §§ 703(b) or 733(b) of the Act, or, if the preliminary determinations are negative, upon notice of affirmative final determinations in those investigations under §§ 705(a) or 735(a) of the Act. Parties that filed entries of appearance in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not enter a separate appearance for the final phase of the investigations. Industrial users, and, if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations. Background On January 12, 2022, Chemical Products Corp., Cartersville, Georgia, filed petitions with the Commission and Commerce, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured and threatened with material injury by reason of subsidized imports of barium chloride from India and LTFV imports of barium chloride from India. Accordingly, effective January 12, 2022, the Commission instituted countervailing duty investigation No. 701–TA–678 and antidumping duty investigation No. 731–TA–1584 (Preliminary). Notice of the institution of the Commission’s investigations and of a public conference to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of January 19, 2022 (87 FR 2901). The Commission conducted its conference on February 2, 2022. All persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to participate. The Commission made these determinations pursuant to §§ 703(a) and 733(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on February 28, 2022. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5295 (March 2022), entitled Barium Chloride from India: Investigation Nos. 701–TA– 678 and 731–TA–1584 (Preliminary). By order of the Commission. Issued: February 28, 2022. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2022–04564 Filed 3–3–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Mar 03, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === Initiation - AD === 7100 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 1 See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Barium Chloride from India,’’ dated January 12, 2022 (the Petition). 2 Id. 3 See Commerce’s Letters, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Barium Chloride from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 14, 2022; and ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Barium Chloride from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 14, 2022; see also Commerce’s Memoranda, ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Barium Chloride from India: Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,’’ dated January 24, 2022; and ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Barium Chloride from India: Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,’’ dated January 24, 2022. 4 See Petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Barium Chloride from India: Response to Supplemental Questionnaire on Volume I of Petition (General Issues and Injury Information),’’ dated January 19, 2022 (General Issues Supplement); ‘‘Barium Chloride from India: Response to Supplemental Questionnaire on Volume II (AD) of Petition,’’ dated January 20, 2022 (India AD Supplement); ‘‘Barium Chloride from India: Response to Supplemental Question on Volume I of Petition (General Issues and Injury Information),’’ dated January 25, 2022 (Revised Exhibit I–4); and ‘‘Barium Chloride from India: Response to Supplemental Question on Volume II of Petition (Antidumping Duties),’’ dated January 25, 2022 (Second India AD Supplement). 5 See infra, section on ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petition.’’ 6 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble). 7 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual information’’). Equipment Co., Ltd. 35. Hangzhou Tonny Electric and Tools Co., Ltd. 36. Hefei Sylux Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. 37. Hong Kong Dayo Company, Ltd. 38. Huazhijie Plastic Products 39. Huiqiao International Shanghai 40. Ilshim Almax 41. Jer Education Technology 42. Jiangsu Weatherford Hongda Petroleum Equipment Co., Ltd. 43. Jiangsu Yizheng Haitian Aluminum Industrial 44. Jiang Yin Ming Ding Aluminum & Plastic Products Co., Ltd 45. Jilin Qixing Aluminum Industries Co., Ltd. 46. Jin Lingfeng Plastic Electrical Appliance 47. Kanal Precision Aluminum Product Co. Ltd. 48. Kingtom Aluminio SRL 49. Larkcop International Co Ltd 50. Ledluz Co Ltd 51. Liansu Group Co. Ltd 52. Links Relocations Beijing 53. Marshell International 54. Ningbo Deye Inverter Technology 55. Ningbo Hightech Development 56. Ningbo Winjoy International Trading 57. Orient Express Container 58. Ou Chuang Plastic Building Material (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd. 59. Pentagon Freight Service 60. Pro Fixture Hong Kong 61. Qingdao Sea Nova Building 62. Qingdao Yahe Imports and Exports 63. Sewon 64. Shandong Huajian Aluminum Industry 65. Shanghai EverSkill M&E Co., Ltd. 66. Shanghai Jingxin Logistics 67. Shanghai Ouma Crafts Co, Ltd. 68. Shanghai Phidix Trading 69. Sinogar Aluminum 70. Transwell Logistics Co., Ltd. 71. United Aluminum 72. Wanhui Industrial China 73. Wenzhou Yongtai Electric Co., Ltd. 74. Winstar Power Technology Limited 75. Wisechain Trading Ltd. 76. Wuxi Lotus Essence 77. Wuxi Rapid Scaffolding Engineering 78. Wuxi Zontai Int’l Corporation Ltd. 79. Xuancheng Huilv Aluminum Industry Co., Ltd. 80. Yekalon Industry Inc 81. Yonn Yuu Enterprise Co., Ltd. 82. Yuyao Royal Industrial 83. Zhejiang Guoyao Aluminum Co., Ltd. 84. Zhongshan Broad Windows and Doors and Curtain 85. ZL Trade Shanghai [FR Doc. 2022–02639 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–908] Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation AGENCY : Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES : Applicable February 1, 2022. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Fred Baker or Preston Cox; AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2924 or (202) 482–5041, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : The Petition On January 12, 2022, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) received an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of barium chloride from India, filed in proper form on behalf of Chemical Products Corporation (the petitioner), a domestic producer of barium chloride. 1 The Petition was accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of barium chloride from India. 2 On January 14 and 24, 2022, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition.3 The petitioner filed responses to these requests on January 19, 20, and 25, 2022.4 In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of barium chloride from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the barium chloride industry in the United States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations. Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry, because the petitioner is an interested party, as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support for the initiation of the requested AD investigation.5 Period of Investigation Because the Petition was filed on January 12, 2022, the period of investigation (POI) for this AD investigation is January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is barium chloride from India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the appendix to this notice. Comments on the Scope of the Investigation 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).6 Commerce will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual information, 7 all such factual information should be limited to public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaire, Commerce requests that all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 7101Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 8 The deadline for comments falls on February 21, 2022, which is a federal holiday. Commerce’s practice dictates that where a deadline falls on a weekend or federal holiday, the appropriate deadline is the next business day (in this instance, February 22, 2022). See Notice of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005) (Notice of Clarification). 9 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 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_on_Electronic_ Filing_Procedures.pdf. 10 See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements Due to COVID–19; Extension of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 10, 2020). 11 The deadline for comments falls on February 21, 2022, which is a federal holiday. Commerce’s practice dictates that where a deadline falls on a weekend or federal holiday, the appropriate deadline is the next business day (in this instance, February 22, 2022). See Notice of Clarification. 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. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 14 See General Issues Supplement at 2–3 and Exhibit GEN–3. p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on February 22, 2022, which is the next business day after 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.8 Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 4, 2022, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline. Commerce requests that any factual information that parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigation may be relevant, the party must contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. Filing Requirements All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception applies.9 An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date on which it is due. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 10 Comments on Product Characteristics Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of barium chloride to be reported in response to Commerce’s AD questionnaire. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant 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 barium chloride, 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, Commerce 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 product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on February 22, 2022, which is the next business day after 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.11 Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 4, 2022, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of the AD 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, 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 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,12 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.13 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 investigation. 14 Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that barium chloride, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 7102 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 15 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Barium Chloride from India (AD Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Barium Chloride from India (Attachment II). This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. 16 See General Issues Supplement at 4. 17 See Petition at Volume I at I–2 through I–4; see also General Issues Supplement at 3–4 and Exhibit GEN–3 (containing Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731–TA–149 (Fifth Review), USITC Pub. 5203 (June 2021) at 7). 18 See Petition at Volume I at I–2 through I–4; see also General Issues Supplement at 3–4 and Exhibit GEN–3. For further discussion, see AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 19 See AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act. 20 See AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 21 Id. 22 Id. 23 See Petition at Volume I at I–10 and Exhibit I–9; see also General Issues Supplement at 5 and Exhibit GEN–4. 24 See Petition at Volume I at I–7 through I–30 and Exhibits I–5 and I–8 through I–12; see also General Issues Supplement at 2–3, 5 and Exhibits GEN–2 and GEN–4. 25 See AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Barium Chloride from India (Attachment III). 26 See AD Initiation Checklist. 27 See AD Initiation Checklist. 28 In accordance with section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for this investigation, Commerce will request information necessary to calculate the CV and COP to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product have been made at prices that represent less than the COP of the product. 29 See AD Initiation Checklist. 30 Id. 31 See AD Initiation Checklist for details of this margin calculation. support in terms of that domestic like product. 15 In determining whether the 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 the appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2021.16 The petitioner provided information from the ITC’s fifth sunset review of barium chloride from the People’s Republic of China, published in June 2021, in which the ITC found that Chemical Products Corporation was the only domestic producer of barium chloride; therefore, the Petition is supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.17 We relied on data provided by the petitioner for purposes of measuring industry support.18 Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petition. 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, Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).19 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. 20 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.21 Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.22 Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The 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 LTFV. In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.23 The petitioner contends that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by a significant volume of subject imports; increasing market share of subject imports; underselling and price depression and/or suppression; inventory levels; declines in production, shipments, and revenues; and lost sales and revenues. 24 We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.25 Allegation of Sales at LTFV The following is a description of the allegation of sales at LTFV upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate this LTFV investigation of imports of barium chloride from India. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the AD Initiation Checklist. U.S. Price The petitioner based export price (EP) on the average unit value (AUV) of publicly available import data for barium chloride from India during the POI and made adjustments for foreign inland freight and foreign brokerage and handling to calculate a net ex-factory U.S. price.26 Normal Value The petitioner provided information indicating that the prices for barium chloride sold or offered for sale in India were below the cost of production (COP). Consequently, the petitioner based NV on constructed value (CV). 27 For further discussion of CV, see ‘‘Normal Value Based on Constructed Value’’ section below.28 Normal Value Based on Constructed Value As noted above, the petitioner provided information indicating that sales or offers for sale of barium chloride in India were made at prices below COP. Therefore, the petitioner calculated NV based on CV.29 Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, the petitioner calculated CV as the sum of the cost of manufacturing; selling, general, and administrative expenses; financial expenses; and profit. 30 Fair Value Comparison Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of barium chloride from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP to NV based on CV in accordance with section 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margin for barium chloride from India is 233.34 percent. 31 Initiation of LTFV Investigation Based upon the examination of the Petition and supplemental responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating this LTFV investigation to determine whether imports of barium chloride from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. In accordance with section VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 7103Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 32 See Revised Exhibit I–4. 33 See Memorandum, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Petition on Imports of Barium Chloride from India: Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data,’’ dated January 26, 2022. 34 See section 733(a) of the Act. 35 Id. 36 See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 37 See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation. Respondent Selection In the Petition, the petitioner named 22 companies in India as producers and/or exporters of barium chloride.32 Following standard practice in AD investigations involving a market economy country, in the event Commerce determines that the number of Indian exporters or producers is large such that Commerce cannot individually examine each company based upon its resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of barium chloride from India during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheading listed in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in the appendix. On January 26, 2022, Commerce released CBP data on U.S. imports of barium chloride from India under administrative protective order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP data and/or respondent selection must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of this investigation.33 Comments on CBP data and respondent selection must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully, in its entirety, via ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline. Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection. We intend to select respondents within 20 days of publication of this notice. 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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo. Distribution of Copies of the Petition In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been provided to the government of India 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 Determination by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of barium chloride from India are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.34 A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated.35 Otherwise, this AD investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. 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 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 36 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. 37 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 this investigation. Particular Market Situation Allegation Section 773(e) of the Act addresses the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for purposes of CV, stating that ‘‘if a particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the administering authority may use another calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation methodology.’’ When an interested party submits a PMS allegation pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify its dumping calculations appropriately. Neither section 773(e) of the Act, nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v), set a deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of a respondent’s initial section D questionnaire response. 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. 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 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, stand-alone submission; Commerce will grant untimely filed requests for the extension of time limits only in limited cases where we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary circumstances exist. Parties should review Commerce’s regulations concerning factual information prior to VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 7104 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 38 See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm. 39 See section 782(b) of the Act. 40 See Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 1 See Xanthan Gum from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2019– 2020, 86 FR 42781 (August 5, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 2 See Memorandum ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2019– 2020 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Xanthan Gum from the People’s Republic of China,’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice. 3 See Xanthan Gum from the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 78 FR 43143 (July 19, 2013) (Order). 4 Fufeng refers to a single entity, which includes: Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. (aka Inner Mongolia Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd.); Shandong Fufeng Fermentation Co., Ltd.; and Xinjiang Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. (collectively, Fufeng). 5 Meihua refers to a single entity, which includes: Meihua Group International Trading (Hong Kong) Limited; Langfang Meihua Biotechnology Co., Ltd.; and Xinjiang Meihua Amino Acid Co., Ltd. (collectively, Meihua). submitting factual information in this investigation. 38 Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.39 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g). 40 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification requirements. 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 this investigation should ensure that they meet the requirements of 19 CFR 351.103(d) (e.g., by filing the required letter of appearance). This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c). Dated: February 1, 2022. Lisa W. Wang, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is barium chloride, a chemical compound having the formulas BaCl2 or BaCl2-2H2O, currently classifiable under subheading 2827.39.4500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2022–02558 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–985] Xanthan Gum From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2019–2020 AGENCY : Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY : The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that except for one respondent for which Commerce calculated a zero percent dumping margin, the other companies subject to this administrative review either made sales of subject merchandise at prices below normal value (NV) during the period of review (POR) July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020, did not ship subject merchandise to the United States during the POR, or were not entitled to a separate rate. DATES : Applicable February 8, 2022. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Abdul Alnoor, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4554. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Background On August 5, 2021, Commerce published the Preliminary Results and invited interested parties to comment. 1 For details regarding the events that occurred since the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 Commerce conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Scope of the Order 3 The scope of the Order covers dry xanthan gum, whether or not coated or blended with other products. For a full description of the scope, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties raised and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https:// access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/ FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. Final Determination of No Shipments In the Preliminary Results, Commerce determined that Shanghai Smart Chemicals Co., Ltd. did not have shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. As we received no information to contradict our preliminary determination with respect to this company, we continue to find that it made no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we corrected certain ministerial errors in the calculation of Fufeng’s,4 one of the mandatory respondents, weighted-average dumping margin. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. Separate Rates No parties commented on our preliminary separate rate findings. Therefore, we have continued to grant Meihua 5 and Fufeng (the mandatory respondents), and two other companies/ company groups listed in the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section below separate rate status. However, we have continued to deny separate rate status to VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === Initiation – CVD === 7094 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 1 See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Barium Chloride from India,’’ dated January 12, 2022 (the Petition). 2 Id. 3 See Commerce’s Letters, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Barium Chloride from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 14, 2022; and ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Barium Chloride from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 19, 2021. 4 See Petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Barium Chloride from India: Response to Supplemental Questionnaire on Volume I of the Petition (General Issues and Injury Information),’’ dated January 19, 2022 (General Issues Supplement); and ‘‘Barium Chloride from India: Response to Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 24, 2022. Non-Discrimination Statement In accordance with Federal civil rights laws and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Mission Areas, agencies, staff offices, employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Program information may be made available in languages other than English. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication to obtain program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language) should contact the responsible Mission Area, agency, or staff office; the USDA TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TTY); or the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, a complainant should complete a Form AD–3027, USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, which can be obtained online at https://www.ocio.usda.gov/document/ ad-3027, from any USDA office, by calling (866) 632–9992, or by writing a letter addressed to USDA. The letter must contain the complainant’s name, address, telephone number, and a written description of the alleged discriminatory action in sufficient detail to inform the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (ASCR) about the nature and date of the alleged civil rights violation. The completed AD–3027 form or letter must be submitted to USDA by: 1. Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410; or 2. Fax: (833) 256–1665 or (202) 690– 7442; or 3. Email: program.intake@usda.gov USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. Joaquin Altoro, Administrator, Rural Housing Service. [FR Doc. 2022–02624 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–XV–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Emerging Technology Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting The Emerging Technology Technical Advisory Committee (ETTAC) will meet on February 23, 2022, at 11:00 a.m., Eastern Standard Time. The meeting will be available via teleconference. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on the identification of emerging and foundational technologies with potential dual-use applications as early as possible in their developmental stages both within the United States and abroad. Agenda Open Session 1. Welcome and Introductions. 2. Introduction by the Bureau of Industry and Security Leadership. 3. Presentation: Space Telescope and Society (NASA), Questions and Answers 4. Public Comments/Announcements Closed Session 5. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The open session will be accessible via teleconference. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at Yvette.Springer@ bis.doc.gov no later than February 16, 2022. To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials prior to the meeting to Ms. Springer via email. The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on February 1, 2022, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 10(d)), that the portion of the meeting dealing with pre- decisional changes to the Commerce Control List and the U.S. export control policies shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public. For more information, please contact Yvette Springer via email. Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 2022–02530 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–JT–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–533–909] Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation AGENCY : Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES : Applicable February 1, 2022. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Tyler Weinhold at (202) 482–1221 and Harrison Tanchuck at (202) 482–7301, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : The Petition On January 12, 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received a countervailing duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of barium chloride from India, filed in proper form on behalf of Chemical Products Corporation (the petitioner), a domestic producer of barium chloride. 1 The Petition was accompanied by an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of barium chloride from India. 2 On January 14 and 19, 2022, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition.3 The petitioner filed responses to these requests on January 19 and 24, 2022.4 In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 7095Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 5 See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions’’ section, infra. 6 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 7 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual information’’). 8 The deadline for comments falls on February 21, 2022, which is a federal holiday. Commerce’s practice dictates that where a deadline falls on a weekend or federal holiday, the appropriate deadline is the next business day (in this instance, February 22, 2022). See Notice of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005) (Notice of Clarification). 9 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% 20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf. 10 See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements Due to COVID–19; Extension of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 10, 2020). 11 See Commerce’s Letters, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Barium Chloride from India: Invitation for Consultations to Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,’’ dated January 13, 2022. 12 See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Barium Chloride from India: Consultations with Officials from the Government of India,’’ dated January 27, 2022. 13 See section 771(10) of the Act. 14 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)). (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of India (GOI) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of barium chloride in India, and that imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the barium chloride industry 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 a CVD investigation, the Petition was accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations. Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry, because the petitioner is an interested party, as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support for the initiation of the requested CVD investigation. 5 Period of Investigation Because the Petition was filed on January 12, 2022, the period of investigation (POI) for this CVD investigation is January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is barium chloride from India. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the appendix to this notice. Comments on Scope of the Investigation 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).6 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, 7 all such factual information should be limited to public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaire, Commerce requests that all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on February 22, 2022, which is the next business day after 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.8 Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 4, 2022, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline. Commerce requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this 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 such comments must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. Filing Requirements All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception applies.9 An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date on which it is due. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 10 Consultations Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce notified the GOI of the receipt of the Petition and provided an opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petition.11 Commerce held consultations with the GOI on January 27, 2022. 12 Determination of Industry Support for the Petition 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 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, 13 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.14 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 7096 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 15 See General Issues Supplement at 2–3 and Exhibit GEN–3. 16 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Barium Chloride from India (CVD Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Barium Chloride from India (Attachment II). This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. 17 See General Issues Supplement at 4. 18 See Petition at Volume I at I–2 through I–4; see also General Issues Supplement at 3–4 and Exhibit GEN–3 (containing Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731–TA–149 (Fifth Review), USITC Pub. 5203 (June 2021) at 7). 19 See Petition at Volume I at I–2 through I–4; see also General Issues Supplement at 3–4 and Exhibit GEN–3. For further discussion, see Attachment II of the CVD Initiation Checklist. 20 See Attachment II of the CVD Initiation Checklist; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act. 21 See Attachment II of the CVD Initiation Checklist. 22 Id. 23 Id. 24 See Petition at Volume I at I–10 and Exhibit I–9; see also General Issues Supplement at 5 and Exhibit GEN–4. 25 See Petition at Volume I at I–7 through I–30 and Exhibits I–5 and I–8 through I–12; see also General Issues Supplement at 2–3, 5 and Exhibits GEN–2 and GEN–4. 26 See CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Barium Chloride from India (Attachment III). 27 See Volume I of the Petition at I–7 and Exhibit I–4. 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 investigation. 15 Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that barium chloride, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.16 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 Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in the appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2021.17 The petitioner provided information from the ITC’s fifth sunset review of barium chloride from the People’s Republic of China, published in June 2021, in which the ITC found that Chemical Products Corporation was the only domestic producer of barium chloride; therefore, the Petition is supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.18 We relied on data provided by the petitioner for purposes of measuring industry support.19 Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petition. 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, Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).20 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 Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product. 21 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(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.22 Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.23 Injury Test Because India is a ‘‘Subsidies Agreement Country’’ within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from India materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting 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 exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.24 The petitioner contends that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by significant volume of subject imports; increasing market share of subject imports; underselling and price depression and/or suppression; inventory levels; declines in production, shipments, and revenues; and lost sales and revenues.25 We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.26 Initiation of CVD Investigations Based upon the examination of the Petition and supplemental responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether imports of barium chloride from India benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOI. 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 these initiations. Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 42 of the 43 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see India CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS. Respondent Selection In the Petition, the petitioner named 22 companies in India as producers/ exporters of barium chloride.27 Commerce intends to follow its standard practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy rates in this investigation. In the event Commerce determines that the number of Indian producers or exporters is large such that Commerce cannot individually examine each company based upon its resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of barium chloride from India during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheading listed in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in the appendix. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 7097Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Notices 28 See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Petitions on Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from India: Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,’’ dated February 12, 2021. 29 See section 703(a) of the Act. 30 Id. 31 See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 32 See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 33 See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm. 34 See section 782(b) of the Act. 35 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. On January 26, 2022, Commerce released CBP data for U.S. imports of barium chloride from India under administrative protective order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP data and/or respondent selection must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of this investigation. 28 Comments on CBP data and respondent selection must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully, in its entirety, via ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline. Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection. We intend to select respondents within 20 days of publication of this notice. 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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo. Distribution of Copies of the Petition 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 Petition has been provided to the GOI 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 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 Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of barium chloride from India are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.29 A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated.30 Otherwise, this CVD investigation will proceed according to the statutory and regulatory time limits. 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 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 31 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. 32 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 this investigation. 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. 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, Commerce 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, stand-alone submission; Commerce will grant untimely filed requests for the extension of time limits only in limited cases where we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary circumstances exist. Parties should review Commerce’s regulations concerning factual information prior to submitting factual information in this investigation.33 Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.34 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g). 35 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification requirements. 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). This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c). Dated: February 1, 2022. Lisa W. Wang, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is barium chloride, a chemical compound having the formulas BaCl2 or BaCl2-2H2O, currently classifiable under subheading 2827.39.4500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2022–02559 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:16 Feb 07, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM 08FEN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── === USITC PUB 5295 === CONTENTS Page i Determinations ..................................................................................................................... 1 Views of the Commission....................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .............................................................................................................. I-1 Background................................................................................................................................ I-1 Statutory criteria ....................................................................................................................... I-2 Organization of report............................................................................................................... I-3 Market summary ....................................................................................................................... I-3 Summary data and data sources ............................................................................................... I-4 Previous and related investigations .......................................................................................... I-5 Nature and extent of alleged subsidies and sales at LTFV ........................................................ I-7 Alleged subsidies ................................................................................................................... I-7 Alleged sales at LTFV ............................................................................................................. I-7 The subject merchandise .......................................................................................................... I-7 Commerce’s scope ................................................................................................................ I-7 Tariff treatment ..................................................................................................................... I-8 The product ............................................................................................................................... I-8 Description and applications ................................................................................................. I-8 Manufacturing processes .................................................................................................... I-10 Domestic like product issues................................................................................................... I-12 Part II: Conditions of competition in the U.S. market........................................................... II-1 U.S. market characteristics....................................................................................................... II-1 Channels of distribution ........................................................................................................... II-2 Geographic distribution ........................................................................................................... II-2 Supply and demand considerations ......................................................................................... II-3 U.S. supply ............................................................................................................................ II-3 U.S. demand ......................................................................................................................... II-5 Substitutability issues............................................................................................................. II-11 Factors affecting purchasing decisions............................................................................... II-11 Comparison of U.S.-produced and imported barium chloride .......................................... II-13 CONTENTS Page ii Part III: U.S. producer’s production, shipments, and employment ...................................... III-1 U.S. producers ......................................................................................................................... III-1 U.S. production, capacity, and capacity utilization ................................................................. III-4 Alternative products ............................................................................................................ III-5 U.S. producer’s U.S. shipments and exports ........................................................................... III-7 Captive consumption ............................................................................................................ III-10 Transfers and sales ............................................................................................................ III-11 First statutory criterion in captive consumption............................................................... III-11 Second statutory criterion in captive consumption .......................................................... III-12 U.S. producer’s inventories ................................................................................................... III-13 U.S. producer’s imports and purchases ................................................................................ III-14 U.S. employment, wages, and productivity .......................................................................... III-15 Part IV: U.S. imports, apparent U.S. consumption, and market shares ................................ IV-1 U.S. importers.......................................................................................................................... IV-1 U.S. imports ............................................................................................................................. IV-3 U.S. shipments of imports ....................................................................................................... IV-6 Negligibility .............................................................................................................................. IV-7 Apparent U.S. consumption of the total market .................................................................... IV-8 Based on quantity................................................................................................................ IV-8 Based on value................................................................................................................... IV-10 Apparent U.S. consumption of the merchant market .......................................................... IV-12 Based on quantity.............................................................................................................. IV-12 Based on value................................................................................................................... IV-14 CONTENTS Page iii Part V: Pricing data ............................................................................................................. V-1 Factors affecting prices ............................................................................................................ V-1 Raw material costs ............................................................................................................... V-1 Energy costs .......................................................................................................................... V-4 Transportation costs to the U.S. market .............................................................................. V-5 U.S. inland transportation costs ........................................................................................... V-5 Pricing practices ....................................................................................................................... V-6 Pricing methods .................................................................................................................... V-6 Sales terms and discounts .................................................................................................... V-7 Price data.................................................................................................................................. V-7 Price trends......................................................................................................................... V-12 Price comparisons .............................................................................................................. V-14 Lost sales and lost revenue .................................................................................................... V-14 Part VI: Financial experience of the U.S. producer .............................................................. VI-1 Background.............................................................................................................................. VI-1 Operations on Barium chloride ............................................................................................... VI-1 Net sales .............................................................................................................................. VI-4 Cost of goods sold and gross profit or loss.......................................................................... VI-6 SG&A expenses and operating income or loss.................................................................... VI-9 Interest expense, other expenses and income, and net income or loss............................. VI-9 Capital expenditures, R&D expenses, total net assets and return on assets ....................... VI-10 Capital and investment ......................................................................................................... VI-10 CONTENTS Page iv Threat considerations and information on nonsubject countries .......................... VII-1 The industry in India ............................................................................................................... VII-3 Changes in operations ........................................................................................................ VII-4 Operations on barium chloride .......................................................................................... VII-5 Alternative products ........................................................................................................... VII-8 Exports ................................................................................................................................ VII-9 U.S. inventories of imported merchandise .......................................................................... VII-12 U.S. importers’ outstanding orders...................................................................................... VII-14 Third-country trade actions ................................................................................................. VII-14 Information on nonsubject countries .................................................................................. VII-14 Appendixes A. Federal Register notices ................................................................................................. A-1 B. List of staff conference witnesses .................................................................................. B-1 C. Summary data ................................................................................................................ C-1 D. Official U.S. import statistics for barium chloride .......................................................... D-1 E. Data tables accompanying figures in part II ................................................................... E-1 F Data tables accompanying figures in part V ................................................................... F-1 G Financial information for merchant market operations ................................................ G-1 Note: Information that would reveal confidential operations of individual concerns may not be published. Such information is identified by brackets in confidential reports and is deleted and replaced with asterisks (***) in public reports. 1 UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Investigation Nos. 701-TA-678 and 731-TA-1584 (Preliminary) Barium Chloride from India DETERMINATIONS On the basis of the record1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of barium chloride from India, provided for in subheading 2827.39.45 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”) and to be subsidized by the government of India.2 COMMENCEMENT OF FINAL PHASE INVESTIGATIONS Pursuant to section 207.18 of the Commission’s rules, the Commission also gives notice of the commencement of the final phase of its investigations. The Commission will issue a final phase notice of scheduling, which will be published in the Federal Register as provided in § 207.21 of the Commission’s rules, upon notice from the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) of affirmative preliminary determinations in the investigations under §§ 703(b) or 733(b) of the Act, or, if the preliminary determinations are negative, upon notice of affirmative final determinations in those investigations under §§ 705(a) or 735(a) of the Act. Parties that filed entries of appearance in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not enter a separate appearance for the final phase of the investigations. Industrial users, and, if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations. 1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 87 FR 7094 and 87 FR 7100 (February 8, 2022). 2 BACKGROUND On January 12, 2022, Chemical Products Corp., Cartersville, Georgia, filed petitions with the Commission and Commerce, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured and threatened with material injury by reason of subsidized imports of barium chloride from India and LTFV imports of barium chloride from India. Accordingly, effective January 12, 2022, the Commission instituted countervailing duty investigation No. 701-TA-678 and antidumping duty investigation No. 731-TA-1584 (Preliminary). Notice of the institution of the Commission’s investigations and of a public conference to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of January 19, 2022 (87 FR 2901). The Commission conducted its conference on February 2, 2022. All persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to participate. 3 Views of the Commission Based on the record in the preliminary phase of these investigations, we determine that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of barium chloride that are allegedly sold in the United States at less than fair value and imports of the subject merchandise from India that are allegedly subsidized by the government of India. I. The Legal Standard for Preliminary Determinations The legal standard for preliminary antidumping and countervailing duty determinations requires the Commission to determine, based upon the information available at the time of the preliminary determinations, whether there is a reasonable indication that a domestic industry is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or that the establishment of an industry is materially retarded, by reason of the allegedly unfairly traded imports.1 In applying this standard, the Commission weighs the evidence before it and determines whether “(1) the record as a whole contains clear and convincing evidence that there is no material injury or threat of such injury; and (2) no likelihood exists that contrary evidence will arise in a final investigation.”2 II. Background Parties to the Investigations. Chemical Products Corp. (“CPC” or “petitioner”), a domestic producer of barium chloride, filed the petitions in these investigations on January 12, 2022. CPC appeared at the staff conference and submitted a postconference brief.3 Two respondent entities participated in these investigations. BassTech International, LLC (“BassTech”), an importer of subject merchandise, and Chaitanya Chemicals (“Chaitanya”), 1 19 U.S.C. §§ 1671b(a), 1673b(a) (2000); see also American Lamb Co. v. United States, 785 F.2d 994, 1001-04 (Fed. Cir. 1986); Aristech Chem. Corp. v. United States, 20 CIT 353, 354-55 (1996). No party argues that the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded by the allegedly unfairly traded imports. 2 American Lamb Co., 785 F.2d at 1001; see also Texas Crushed Stone Co. v. United States, 35 F.3d 1535, 1543 (Fed. Cir. 1994). 3 In light of the restrictions on access to the Commission building due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Commission conducted its staff conference by videoconference and written witness testimony as set forth in procedures provided to the parties. 4 a producer and exporter of subject merchandise, appeared at the conference and submitted postconference briefs. Data Coverage. U.S. industry data are based on the questionnaire response of CPC, which accounted for an estimated *** percent of U.S. production of barium chloride in 2020.4 U.S. import data are based on questionnaire responses from eleven U.S. importers, eight of which are U.S. importers of subject merchandise, two of which are U.S. importers of nonsubject imports, and one that imported barium chloride from both sources, believed to account for *** imports of barium chloride from all sources.5 The Commission received responses to its questionnaires from two foreign producers of subject merchandise, accounting for *** percent of U.S. imports of barium chloride from India in 2020.6 7 III. Domestic Like Product In determining whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of the subject merchandise, the Commission first defines the “domestic like product” and the “industry.”8 Section 771(4)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Tariff Act”), defines the relevant domestic industry as the “producers as a whole of a domestic like product, or those producers whose collective output of a domestic like product constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of the product.”9 In turn, the Tariff Act defines 4 Confidential Report, Memorandum INV-UU-016, (“CR”), Public Report (“PR”) at I-4. 5 CR/PR at I-4. 6 CR/PR at VII-3. 7 In October 1984, the Commission determined that an industry in the United States was materially injured by reason of imports of barium chloride from China sold at less than fair value. Barium Chloride from the People’s Republic of China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Final), USITC Pub. 1584 (Oct. 1984) (“China Original Determination”) at 3, A-1. The Commission has subsequently conducted five five- year reviews regarding the antidumping duty order on barium chloride from China; and the order remains in place. Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Review), USITC Pub. 3163 (Mar. 1999); Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Second Review), USITC Pub. 3702 (July 2004); Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Third Review), USITC Pub. 4157 (June 2010); Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Fourth Review), USITC Pub. 4574 (Oct. 2015); Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Fifth Review), USITC Pub. 5203 (June 2021). The scope in the reviews regarding the orders on barium chloride from China is substantively the same as the scope in the present investigations. Barium Chloride from China, USITC Pub. 5203 at 6; see also Petitions at I-7. 8 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(A). 9 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(A). 5 “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.”10 By statute, the Commission’s “domestic like product” analysis begins with the “article subject to an investigation,” i.e., the subject merchandise as determined by Commerce.11 Therefore, Commerce’s determination as to the scope of the imported merchandise that is subsidized and/or sold at less than fair value is “necessarily the starting point of the Commission’s like product analysis.”12 The Commission then defines the domestic like product in light of the imported articles Commerce has identified.13 The decision regarding the appropriate domestic like product(s) in an investigation is a factual determination, and the Commission has applied the statutory standard of “like” or “most similar in characteristics and uses” on a case-by-case basis.14 No single factor is dispositive, and the Commission may consider other factors it deems relevant based on the facts of a particular investigation.15 The Commission looks for clear dividing lines among possible like products and disregards minor 10 19 U.S.C. § 1677(10). 11 19 U.S.C. § 1677(10). The Commission must accept Commerce’s determination as to the scope of the imported merchandise that is subsidized and/or sold at less than fair value. See, e.g., USEC, Inc. v. United States, 34 Fed. App’x 725, 730 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (“The ITC may not modify the class or kind of imported merchandise examined by Commerce.”); Algoma Steel Corp. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1988), aff’d, 865 F.3d 240 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 919 (1989). 12 Cleo Inc. v. United States, 501 F.3d 1291, 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also Hitachi Metals, Ltd. v. United States, Case No. 19-1289, slip op. at 8-9 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 7, 2020) (the statute requires the Commission to start with Commerce’s subject merchandise in reaching its own like product determination). 13 Cleo, 501 F.3d at 1298 n.1 (“Commerce’s {scope} finding does not control the Commission’s {like product} determination.”); Hosiden Corp. v. Advanced Display Mfrs., 85 F.3d 1561, 1568 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (the Commission may find a single like product corresponding to several different classes or kinds defined by Commerce); Torrington Co. v. United States, 747 F. Supp. 744, 748–52 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1990), aff’d, 938 F.2d 1278 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (affirming the Commission’s determination defining six like products in investigations where Commerce found five classes or kinds). 14 See, e.g., Cleo Inc. v. United States, 501 F.3d 1291, 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2007); NEC Corp. v. Dep’t of Commerce, 36 F. Supp. 2d 380, 383 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1998); Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 19 CIT 450, 455 (1995); Torrington Co. v. United States, 747 F. Supp. 744, 749 n.3 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1990), aff’d, 938 F.2d 1278 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (“every like product determination ‘must be made on the particular record at issue’ and the ‘unique facts of each case’”). The Commission generally considers a number of factors including the following: (1) physical characteristics and uses; (2) interchangeability; (3) channels of distribution; (4) customer and producer perceptions of the products; (5) common manufacturing facilities, production processes, and production employees; and, where appropriate, (6) price. See Nippon, 19 CIT at 455 n.4; Timken Co. v. United States, 913 F. Supp. 580, 584 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1996). 15 See, e.g., S. Rep. No. 96-249 at 90-91 (1979). 6 variations.16 The Commission may, where appropriate, include domestic articles in the domestic like product in addition to those described in the scope.17 In its notices of initiation, Commerce defined the imported merchandise within the scope of these investigations as follows: The merchandise covered by this investigation is barium chloride, a chemical compound having the formulas BaCl 2 or BaCl 2 -2H2 O, currently classifiable under subheading 2827.39.4500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.18 Barium chloride is produced in crystalline and anhydrous form. In its crystalline form, barium chloride is primarily used as an intermediate in the production of molecular catalyst sieves; in its anhydrous form, barium chloride is primarily used as an ingredient in heat-treating salts and metal fluxes.19 16 See, e.g., Nippon, 19 CIT at 455; Torrington, 747 F. Supp. at 748-49; see also S. Rep. No. 96-249 at 90-91 (Congress has indicated that the like product standard should not be interpreted in “such a narrow fashion as to permit minor differences in physical characteristics or uses to lead to the conclusion that the product and article are not ‘like’ each other, nor should the definition of ‘like product’ be interpreted in such a fashion as to prevent consideration of an industry adversely affected by the imports under consideration.”). 17 See, e.g., Pure Magnesium from China and Israel, Inv. Nos. 701-TA-403 and 731-TA-895-896 (Final), USITC Pub. 3467 at 8 n.34 (Nov. 2001); Torrington, 747 F. Supp. at 748-49 (holding that the Commission is not legally required to limit the domestic like product to the product advocated by the petitioner, co-extensive with the scope). 18 Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 87 Fed. Reg. 7094 (Feb. 8, 2022); Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 87 Fed. Reg. 7100 (Feb. 8, 2022). 19 CR/PR at I-3, I-8 – I-9. 7 a. Arguments of the Parties Petitioner’s Argument. CPC argues that the Commission should define a single domestic like product consisting of barium chloride, coextensive with the scope in these investigations, as it has in the prior reviews involving barium chloride from China.20 Respondents’ Argument. For purposes of the preliminary phase of these investigations, BassTech does not challenge the proposed definition of a single domestic like product coextensive with the scope.21 b. Analysis and Conclusion Based on the record, we define a single domestic like product consisting of barium chloride. Physical Characteristics and Uses. Barium chloride in crystalline and anhydrous form share the same chemical composition, although they are used in different end-use applications.22 Crystalline barium chloride is used primarily as an intermediate in the production of molecular catalyst sieves, which in turn are used in oil refinery complexes to separate industrially useful paraxylene molecules from other mixed xylenes.23 The crystalline form also serves as a cleansing agent in the removal of soluble sulfates in certain chemical and water treatment processes; as a cleansing ingredient in lubricating oil additives; as a raw material in the production of certain chemicals, pigments, and paper coatings; and as a base material for the production of ink pigments and other barium intermediate products. The anhydrous form of barium chloride is used primarily as an ingredient in heat-treating salts and metal fluxes, which are used to create molten baths that harden metal parts, such as specialty steel parts like tools and dies.24 Manufacturing Facilities, Production Processes, and Employees. Domestically produced barium chloride shares the same production process up to the final stage, in which anhydrous barium chloride undergoes additional processing. Specifically, CPC produces barium chloride by crushing barite ore (naturally occurring barium sulfate), mixing it with petroleum coke, and reducing it at high temperatures to barium sulfide, which is purified and dissolved in water. The barium sulfide solution is then reacted with hydrochloric acid to remove the byproduct 20 CPC Postconference Br. at 3. 21 BassTech Postconference Br. at 2. Chaitanya does not address this issue. See generally Chaitanya Postconference Br. 22 CR/PR at I-8 – I-9. 23 Paraxylene is a raw material used in the production of terephthalic acid, a precursor to polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which is used in the downstream production of clothing and plastic bottles. Tr. at 14 (Bourdon); Petitions, p. I-5. 24 CR/PR at I-8 – I-9; Tr. at 15 (Bourdon). 8 hydrogen sulfide as a gas. When the resulting solution is evaporated, barium chloride crystals remain. The crystalline form is reduced to the anhydrous form by applying intense heat, which drives off the water that is molecularly bonded in the crystals.25 Channels of Distribution. Barium chloride in crystalline form accounted for a *** majority of CPC’s U.S. shipments of barium chloride during the period of investigation (“POI”),26 and the *** majority of CPC’s U.S. shipments during the POI were to end users.27 Interchangeability. As discussed above, the record in these investigations indicates that barium chloride in crystalline and anhydrous forms are used in different end use applications.28 Producer and Customer Perceptions. CPC does not perceive barium chloride in crystalline and anhydrous forms to be separate domestic like products.29 Price. The record in the preliminary phase of these investigations indicates that domestically produced crystalline barium chloride was generally priced lower than anhydrous barium chloride during most of the POI, although they were priced comparably in two quarters of the POI.30 Conclusion. The record in the preliminary phase of these investigations indicates that barium chloride in crystalline and anhydrous forms share the same chemical composition and production processes up to the final production stage, although there are differences in end uses, which affects interchangeability, as well as differences in price. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of contrary party argument, we define a single domestic like product consisting of barium chloride, coextensive with the scope, for purposes of our preliminary determinations.31 25 CR/PR at I-10 – I-11. 26 CR/PR at Table III-7. 27 CR/PR at Table II-1. 28 CR/PR at I-9. 29 CPC Postconference Br. at 3. 30 CR/PR at Tables V-3, V-4, V-5. 31 This is consistent with previous investigations and reviews regarding barium chloride, in which the Commission defined barium chloride in crystalline and anhydrous forms as a single domestic like products. See, e.g., Barium Chloride from China, USITC Pub. 5203 at 5-6. 9 IV. Domestic Industry The domestic industry is defined as the domestic “producers as a whole of a domestic like product, or those producers whose collective output of a domestic like product constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of the product.”32 In defining the domestic industry, the Commission’s general practice has been to include in the industry producers of all domestic production of the like product, whether toll-produced, captively consumed, or sold in the domestic merchant market. CPC claims that it is the only remaining domestic producer of barium chloride for the commercial market and as such constitutes the domestic industry.33 BassTech does not challenge the proposed definition of the domestic industry, consisting solely of CPC.34 These investigations raise no domestic industry issues at the preliminary phase.35 In light of our domestic like product definition, we define a single domestic industry consisting of all U.S. producers of barium chloride, namely CPC. 32 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(A). 33 Petitions at I-2 – I-4. 34 BassTech Postconference Br. at 2. Chaitanya does not address this issue. See generally Chaitanya Postconference Br. 35 Although CPC ***, it purchased a small volume of subject merchandise from two U.S. importers ***. CR/PR at III-14 & Table III-11. A domestic producer shall be considered to be a related party if it directly or indirectly controls an exporter, importer, or third party. 19 U.S.C. § 1677(4)(B). A domestic producer that does not itself import subject merchandise or does not share a corporate affiliation with an importer may nonetheless be deemed a related party if it controls large volumes of subject imports. See SAA at 858. The Commission has found such control to exist, for example, where the domestic producer’s purchases were responsible for a predominant proportion of an importer’s subject imports and the importer’s subject imports were substantial. See, e.g., Iron Construction Castings from Brazil, Canada, and China, Inv. Nos. 701-TA-248, 731-TA-262-263, 265 (Fourth Review), USITC Pub. 4655 at 11 (Dec. 2016); Chlorinated Isocyanurates from China and Spain, Inv. Nos. 731-TA- 1082-1083 (Second Review), USITC Pub. 4646 at 12 (Nov. 2016). CPC purchased *** pounds of subject imports from importer ***, which accounted for only *** percent of *** total imports of subject merchandise that year. CR/PR at Table III-11; *** Importer Questionnaire Response. Accordingly, CPC was not responsible for a predominant proportion of *** total subject imports of barium chloride that year. Additionally, CPC purchased *** pounds of subject merchandise from importer ***. CR/PR at Table III-11; *** Importer Questionnaire Response. Although CPC’s purchases accounted for *** of *** subject imports, the total volume of *** subject imports accounted for only *** percent of total imports of subject merchandise ***. Calculated from CR/PR at Tables III-11, IV-2, *** Importer Questionnaire Response. Thus, *** imports were not substantial. Accordingly, based on the current record, CPC does not qualify for exclusion pursuant to the related party provision because it did not control large volumes of subject imports. 10 V. Negligible Imports Pursuant to Section 771(24) of the Tariff Act, imports from a subject country of merchandise corresponding to a domestic like product that account for less than 3 percent of all such merchandise imported into the United States during the most recent 12 months for which data are available preceding the filing of the petition shall be deemed negligible.36 During the 12-month period preceding filing of the petitions (January 2021 – December 2021), subject imports for both the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations accounted for *** percent of total imports of barium chloride.37 We therefore find that subject imports are not negligible. VI. Reasonable Indication of Material Injury by Reason of Subject Imports A. Legal Standard In the preliminary phase of antidumping and countervailing duty investigations, the Commission determines whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of the imports under investigation.38 In making this determination, the Commission must consider the volume of subject imports, their effect on prices for the domestic like product, and their impact on domestic producers of the domestic like product, but only in the context of U.S. production operations.39 The statute defines “material injury” as “harm which is not inconsequential, immaterial, or unimportant.”40 In assessing whether there is a reasonable indication that the domestic industry is materially injured by reason of subject imports, we consider all relevant economic factors that bear on the state of the industry in the United States.41 No single factor is dispositive, and all relevant factors are considered “within the context of the business cycle and conditions of competition that are distinctive to the affected industry.”42 36 19 U.S.C. §§ 1671b(a), 1673b(a), 1677(24)(A)(i), 1677(24)(B); see also 15 C.F.R. § 2013.1 (developing countries for purposes of 19 U.S.C. § 1677(36)). 37 CR/PR at Table IV-4. 38 19 U.S.C. §§ 1671b(a), 1673b(a). 39 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B). The Commission “may consider such other economic factors as are relevant to the determination” but shall “identify each {such} factor ... and explain in full its relevance to the determination.” 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B). 40 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(A). 41 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii). 42 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii). 11 Although the statute requires the Commission to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that the domestic industry is “materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of” unfairly traded imports,43 it does not define the phrase “by reason of,” indicating that this aspect of the injury analysis is left to the Commission’s reasonable exercise of its discretion.44 In identifying a causal link, if any, between subject imports and material injury to the domestic industry, the Commission examines the facts of record that relate to the significance of the volume and price effects of the subject imports and any impact of those imports on the condition of the domestic industry. This evaluation under the “by reason of” standard must ensure that subject imports are more than a minimal or tangential cause of injury and that there is a sufficient causal, not merely a temporal, nexus between subject imports and material injury.45 In many investigations, there are other economic factors at work, some or all of which may also be having adverse effects on the domestic industry. Such economic factors might include nonsubject imports; changes in technology, demand, or consumer tastes; competition among domestic producers; or management decisions by domestic producers. The legislative history explains that the Commission must examine factors other than subject imports to ensure that it is not attributing injury from other factors to the subject imports, thereby inflating an otherwise tangential cause of injury into one that satisfies the statutory material 43 19 U.S.C. §§ 1671b(a), 1673b(a). 44 Angus Chemical Co. v. United States, 140 F.3d 1478, 1484-85 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (“{T}he statute does not ‘compel the commissioners’ to employ {a particular methodology}.”), aff’g, 944 F. Supp. 943, 951 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1996). 45 The Federal Circuit, in addressing the causation standard of the statute, observed that “{a}s long as its effects are not merely incidental, tangential, or trivial, the foreign product sold at less than fair value meets the causation requirement.” Nippon Steel Corp. v. USITC, 345 F.3d 1379, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2003). This was further ratified in Mittal Steel Point Lisas Ltd. v. United States, 542 F.3d 867, 873 (Fed. Cir. 2008), where the Federal Circuit, quoting Gerald Metals, Inc. v. United States, 132 F.3d 716, 722 (Fed. Cir. 1997), stated that “this court requires evidence in the record ‘to show that the harm occurred “by reason of” the LTFV imports, not by reason of a minimal or tangential contribution to material harm caused by LTFV goods.’” See also Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 458 F.3d 1345, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Taiwan Semiconductor Industry Ass’n v. USITC, 266 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2001). 12 injury threshold.46 In performing its examination, however, the Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfairly traded imports.47 Nor does the “by reason of” standard require that unfairly traded imports be the “principal” cause of injury or contemplate that injury from unfairly traded imports be weighed against other factors, such as nonsubject imports, which may be contributing to overall injury to an industry.48 It is clear that the existence of injury caused by other factors does not compel a negative determination.49 Assessment of whether material injury to the domestic industry is “by reason of” subject imports “does not require the Commission to address the causation issue in any particular way” as long as “the injury to the domestic industry can reasonably be attributed to the subject 46 SAA at 851-52 (“{T}he Commission must examine other factors to ensure that it is not attributing injury from other sources to the subject imports.”); S. Rep. 96-249 at 75 (1979) (the Commission “will consider information which indicates that harm is caused by factors other than less- than-fair-value imports.”); H.R. Rep. 96-317 at 47 (1979) (“in examining the overall injury being experienced by a domestic industry, the ITC will take into account evidence presented to it which demonstrates that the harm attributed by the petitioner to the subsidized or dumped imports is attributable to such other factors;” those factors include “the volume and prices of nonsubsidized imports or imports sold at fair value, contraction in demand or changes in patterns of consumption, trade restrictive practices of and competition between the foreign and domestic producers, developments in technology and the export performance and productivity of the domestic industry”); accord Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 877. 47 SAA at 851-52 (“{T}he Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfair imports.”); Taiwan Semiconductor Industry Ass’n, 266 F.3d at 1345 (“{T}he Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfair imports ... . Rather, the Commission must examine other factors to ensure that it is not attributing injury from other sources to the subject imports.” (emphasis in original)); Asociacion de Productores de Salmon y Trucha de Chile AG v. United States, 180 F. Supp. 2d 1360, 1375 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2002) (“{t}he Commission is not required to isolate the effects of subject imports from other factors contributing to injury” or make “bright-line distinctions” between the effects of subject imports and other causes.); see also Softwood Lumber from Canada, Inv. Nos. 701-TA-414 and 731-TA-928 (Remand), USITC Pub. 3658 at 100-01 (Dec. 2003) (Commission recognized that “{i}f an alleged other factor is found not to have or threaten to have injurious effects to the domestic industry, i.e., it is not an ‘other causal factor,’ then there is nothing to further examine regarding attribution to injury”), citing Gerald Metals, 132 F.3d at 722 (the statute “does not suggest that an importer of LTFV goods can escape countervailing duties by finding some tangential or minor cause unrelated to the LTFV goods that contributed to the harmful effects on domestic market prices.”). 48 S. Rep. 96-249 at 74-75; H.R. Rep. 96-317 at 47. 49 See Nippon Steel Corp., 345 F.3d at 1381 (“an affirmative material-injury determination under the statute requires no more than a substantial-factor showing. That is, the ‘dumping’ need not be the sole or principal cause of injury.”). 13 imports.”50 The Commission ensures that it has “evidence in the record” to “show that the harm occurred ‘by reason of’ the LTFV imports,” and that it is “not attributing injury from other sources to the subject imports.” 51 The Federal Circuit has examined and affirmed various Commission methodologies and has disavowed “rigid adherence to a specific formula.”52 The question of whether the material injury threshold for subject imports is satisfied notwithstanding any injury from other factors is factual, subject to review under the substantial evidence standard.53 Congress has delegated this factual finding to the Commission because of the agency’s institutional expertise in resolving injury issues.54 50 Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 876 &78; see also id. at 873 (“While the Commission may not enter an affirmative determination unless it finds that a domestic industry is materially injured ‘by reason of’ subject imports, the Commission is not required to follow a single methodology for making that determination ... {and has} broad discretion with respect to its choice of methodology.”), citing United States Steel Group v. United States, 96 F.3d 1352, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1996) and S. Rep. 96-249 at 75. In its decision in Swiff-Train v. United States, 793 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2015), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission’s causation analysis as comporting with the Court’s guidance in Mittal. 51 Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 873 (quoting from Gerald Metals, 132 F.3d at 722), 877-79. We note that one relevant “other factor” may involve the presence of significant volumes of price-competitive nonsubject imports in the U.S. market, particularly when a commodity product is at issue. In appropriate cases, the Commission collects information regarding nonsubject imports and producers in nonsubject countries in order to conduct its analysis. 52 Nucor Corp. v. United States, 414 F.3d 1331, 1336, 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2005); see also Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 879 (“Bratsk did not read into the antidumping statute a Procrustean formula for determining whether a domestic injury was ‘by reason’ of subject imports.”). 53 We provide in our discussion below a full analysis of other factors alleged to have caused any material injury experienced by the domestic industry. 54 Mittal Steel, 542 F.3d at 873; Nippon Steel Corp., 458 F.3d at 1350, citing U.S. Steel Group, 96 F.3d at 1357; S. Rep. 96-249 at 75 (“The determination of the ITC with respect to causation is ... complex and difficult, and is a matter for the judgment of the ITC.”). 14 B. Conditions of Competition and the Business Cycle The following conditions of competition inform our analysis of whether there is a reasonable indication of material injury by reason of subject imports.55 1. Demand Conditions Demand for barium chloride derives from the end use applications in which it is used. The largest end-use application is the production of molecular catalyst sieves in oil refining.56 Other end uses include chemical and water treatment processes related to construction and drilling; the production of certain chemicals, pigments, and paper coatings; and as a base material for the production of ink pigments and other barium intermediate products.57 Anhydrous barium chloride is used primarily as an ingredient in heat-treating salts and metal fluxes to harden metal specialty steel parts like tools and dies.58 The parties describe the U.S. barium chloride market as being mature, with the number of end uses decreasing over time.59 The parties also agree demand for barium chloride in the United States declined during the POI, and agree that the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to the decline, but otherwise disagree as to 55 We observe that CPC internally consumed barium chloride during the POI. In considering the applicability of the statutory captive production provision, 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iv), we find that the threshold criterion, which requires that “domestic producers internally transfer significant production of the domestic like product for the production of a downstream article and sell significant production of the domestic like product in the merchant market,” is met. In the preliminary phase of these investigations, internal consumption accounted for between *** percent and *** percent of the domestic industry’s total shipments of barium chloride while commercial shipments accounted for between *** percent and *** percent of the quantity of the domestic industry’s total shipments, by quantity, during each year and interim period of the POI. CR/PR at Table III-6. We likewise find that the first statutory criterion, which focuses on whether any of the domestic like product that is transferred internally for further processing is in fact sold on the merchant market, also appears to be satisfied, as the record indicates that CPC did not divert barium chloride that was intended to be internally consumed to the merchant market. CR at III-11 & Table III-8. We find, however, that the second statutory criterion, which requires that the domestic like product be the predominant material input in the production of the downstream article, is not met. The record in the preliminary phase indicates that barium chloride accounts for *** percent of the share of the value/cost, and *** percent of the share of total inputs, of CPC’s downstream product. CR/PR at Table III-9. We note that neither CPC nor any respondent argued in this preliminary phase of the investigations that the Commission should apply the captive production provision. 56 CR/PR at I-8 – I-9, II-5 – II-6. 57 CR/PR at I-8 – I-9, II-5 – II-6. 58 CR/PR at I-8 – I-9, II-5 – II-6; Tr. at 14-15 (Bourdon). 59 CR/PR at II-5; Petitions at I-11; Tr. at 18, 20 (Ingram), 41 (Bourdon), 114 (Chalup). 15 timing and drivers of demand prior to the pandemic.60 Apparent U.S. consumption declined from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019 and *** pounds in 2020; it was *** pounds in January-September (“interim”) 2020 and *** pounds in interim 2021.61 2. Supply Conditions The U.S. barium chloride market is supplied predominantly by CPC and subject imports, with nonsubject imports accounting for only a small share of the market during the POI. CPC is the only known commercial producer of barium chloride in the U.S. market and believed to account for *** percent of barium chloride production in the United States in 2020.62 During the POI, CPC’s capacity decreased from *** pounds in 2018 and 2019 to *** pounds in 2020; it was higher in interim 2021 at *** pounds compared to *** pounds in interim 2020.63 At the beginning of the POI, CPC was the largest source of supply but it steadily lost market share to subject imports. CPC’s market share declined from *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption in 2018 to *** percent in 2019 and to *** percent in 2020; its market share was *** percent in interim 2020 and *** percent in interim 2021.64 60 CPC Postconference Br. at 7; BassTech Postconference Br. at 7-9. According to CPC, barium chloride use in oil refining is cyclical and, as such, the rise in petroleum prices from 2016 to 2018 contributed to increasing demand for barium chloride, while a drop in petroleum prices in April 2020 contributed to a drop in demand for barium chloride in the second half of 2020, continuing into 2021. CPC further claims that the use of barium chloride in wastewater treatment is affected by general economic conditions. CPC Postconference Br. at 5-7. BassTech disputes CPC’s assertions regarding demand drivers. Specifically, it asserts that oil prices “may be a component of demand,” but it also claims that there have been periods of high oil prices with low consumption of barium chloride. It also disputes that barium chloride demand is driven by broader macroeconomic trends, claiming that while the U.S. economy experienced growth from 2018 to 2019, demand for barium chloride declined. According to BassTech, demand for barium chloride is driven by its various end uses, particularly ***, but demand for barium chloride is more complicated because barium chloride of different quality or product specifications are used in different end-use sectors. BassTech asserts that certain end uses, such as the production of ink pigments, have moved overseas, while others, such as the production of ChloroAlkali, have replaced barium chloride with “better quality salts.” BassTech Postconference Br. at 9-11. 61 CR/PR at Table C-1. Thus, apparent U.S. consumption declined *** percent from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percent lower in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 62 CR/PR at III-1; CPC Postconference Br. at 9; Petitions at I-3. CPC asserts that it is the sole remaining commercial producer of barium chloride in the United States and notes that other companies may produce small amounts of barium chloride for their internal consumption. CR/PR at III-1 nn. 2 and 3. 63 CR/PR at Table III-3. 64 CR/PR at Table C-1. Accordingly, CPC’s market share declined *** percentage points from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percentage points lower in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 16 Subject imports increased market share and became the principal source of barium chloride in the United States during the POI. Subject import market share was *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption in 2018, *** percent in 2019, and *** percent in 2020; it was *** percent in interim 2020 and *** percent in interim 2021.65 66 In contrast, nonsubject imports accounted for less than *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption throughout the POI. Nonsubject import market share declined from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2019 and to *** percent in 2020; it was *** percent in both interim periods.67 Sources of nonsubject imports were China, which is subject to an antidumping duty order, Mexico, and the United Kingdom.68 3. Substitutability and Other Conditions Based on the record in the preliminary phase of these investigations, we find that there is at least a moderate-to-high degree of substitutability between the domestic like product and subject imports. Factors contributing to substitutability include similar quality and availability of barium chloride sold from inventory, at least some perception of interchangeability by market participants between domestic and subject sources, and the importance that price plays as a purchase factor.69 Factors that may limit substitutability include different lead times between the United States and India, and the potential influence of purchaser preferences for diverse supply sources.70 As discussed above, CPC and subject imports account for the vast majority of the supply options for barium chloride in the U.S. market with nonsubject imports maintaining only a very small presence. CPC asserts that domestic barium chloride and subject imports are “***” interchangeable. Four of six responding importers report that they are 65 CR/PR at Table C-1. Thus, subject import market share increased *** percentage points from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percentage points higher in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 66 Most firms, including *** indicated that they did not experience supply constraints since January 1, 2018. CR/PR at II-5. *** reported that an increase in global demand in early 2018 ***. CR/PR at II-5. Importer *** reported supply constraints related to ***, and importer *** reported supply constraints related to ***. CR/PR at II-5. 67 CR/PR at Table C-1. Accordingly, nonsubject import market share declined *** percentage points from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percentage points higher in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 68 CR/PR at I-5 – I-6, II-4 – II-5, VII-3 n.8. 69 CR/PR at II-11. More purchasers that responded to the Commission’s questionnaire listed price/cost among the top three most important factors in purchasing decisions than any other purchasing factor. Indeed, all responding purchasers listed price/cost in their top three purchasing factors. Price/cost was the most frequently reported second- and third-most important purchasing factor. CR/PR at Table II-5. 70 CR/PR at II-11. 17 “sometimes” interchangeable, with one importer reporting “always” and one importer reporting “frequently.” No importer reported that they are “never” interchangeable.71 We also find that price is an important factor in purchasing decisions. Price was cited most frequently as among purchasers’ top three purchasing factors, although availability/ability to supply was most frequently cited as the top factor.72 CPC and most importers reported that differences other than price are “***” important.73 The parties describe the U.S. barium chloride market as concentrated, consisting of a small number of purchasers,74 among which *** accounted for the largest volume of purchases of both the domestic like product and subject imports during the POI.75 Barium chloride is primarily sold from inventory.76 CPC reported that *** percent of its barium chloride is sold from inventory, with an average lead time of *** days.77 Importers reported selling *** percent of their barium chloride from U.S. inventories, with an average lead time of *** days; they also reported selling *** percent from foreign producers’ inventories with an average lead time of *** days and *** percent produced to order, with an average lead time of *** days.78 Domestic barium chloride is produced from three primary raw materials: barite ore, petroleum coke, and hydrochloric acid.79 During the POI, CPC’s raw material costs as a share of 71 CR/PR at Tables II-6, II-7. 72 CR/PR at Table II-5. 73 CP/PR at Tables II-8, II-9. Only one out of five responding importers reported that there were always or frequently differences other than price between U.S.-produced barium chloride and subject imports. Respondents maintain that *** was instrumental in introducing subject imports to the U.S. market and argue that there are non-price differences between subject imports and the domestic like product such as ***. BassTech Postconference Br. at 3-7; Chaitanya Postconference Br. at 10-14. In its explanation of why it purchases subject imports instead of the domestic like product, however, *** states that it primarily purchases subject imports ***. CR/PR at Table V-9. We will explore the importance of any non-price differences between subject imports and the domestic like product further in any final phase of these investigations. 74 Tr. at 20 (Ingram), 112 (Gupta). 75 CR/PR at Table V-7. 76 CR/PR at II-12. 77 CR/PR at II-12. 78 CR/PR at II-12 – II-13. 79 Domestic barium chloride is produced by crushing barite ore, mixing it with petroleum coke, and reacting it with hydrochloric acid. The resulting solution is evaporated, and barium chloride in crystalline form remains. To form anhydrous barium chloride, the crystalline form is reduced by applying intense heat, which drives off the water that is molecularly bonded in the crystals. CR/PR at I- 10 – I-11. 18 its total cost of goods sold (“COGS”) increased from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2020 and was *** percent in January-September 2021.80 C. Volume of Subject Imports Section 771(7)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act provides that the “Commission shall consider whether the volume of imports of the merchandise, or any increase in that volume, either in absolute terms or relative to production or consumption in the United States, is significant.”81 During the POI, the volume of subject imports decreased overall, initially decreasing from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019 and then increasing to *** pounds in 2020; the volume of subject imports was lower at *** pounds in interim 2021 than in interim 2020 at *** pounds.82 Importers’ U.S. shipments of subject imports also declined but to a lesser degree. They were *** pounds in 2018, *** pounds in 2019, and *** pounds in 2020; U.S. shipments of subject imports were *** pounds in interim 2020 and in interim 2021.83 As apparent U.S. consumption declined, subject imports gained market share.84 Subject import market share increased from *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption in 2018 to *** percent in 2019 and to *** percent in 2020; it was *** percent in interim 2020 and *** percent in interim 2021.85 Relative to U.S. production, the volume of subject imports increased from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2019 and to *** percent in 2020; it was higher in interim 2021 at *** percent than in in interim 2020 at *** percent.86 Based on the foregoing, we find that the volume of subject imports was significant in absolute terms as well as relative to U.S. consumption and production. We further find that the increase in volume relative to U.S. consumption and production was also significant. 80 CR/PR at V-1. 81 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(i). 82 CR/PR at Table IV-2. 83 CR/PR at Table IV-5. 84 As reviewed above, apparent U.S. consumption declined from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019 and *** pounds in 2020; it was *** pounds in interim 2020 and *** pounds in interim 2021. CR/PR at Table C-1. 85 CR/PR at Table C-1. CR/PR at Table C-1. Thus, subject import market share increased *** percentage points from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percentage points higher in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 86 CR/PR at Table IV-2. Accordingly, relative to U.S. production, the volume of subject imports increased *** percentage points from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percentage points higher in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 19 D. Price Effects of the Subject Imports Section 771(7)(C)(ii) of the Tariff Act provides that, in evaluating the price effects of subject imports, the Commission shall consider whether – (I) there has been significant price underselling by the imported merchandise as compared with the price of domestic like products of the United States, and (II) the effect of imports of such merchandise otherwise depresses prices to a significant degree or prevents price increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree.87 As discussed above, we find there to be at least a moderate-to-high degree of substitutability between the domestic like product and subject imports and that price is an important purchasing factor. The Commission requested U.S. producers and importers to provide quarterly data for the total quantity and f.o.b. value of two barium chloride products shipped to unrelated U.S. customers during January 2018-September 2021.88 CPC and nine importers provided usable pricing data for sales of the requested products, although not all firms reported pricing for all products for all quarters.89 Pricing data reported by these firms accounted for approximately *** percent of U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments of barium chloride and *** percent of U.S. shipments of subject imports from India in 2020.90 Subject imports undersold the domestic like product in all 22 quarterly comparisons, involving *** pounds of imported barium chloride, at margins ranging from 9.0 to 62.5 percent.91 We also considered purchasers’ responses to the Commission’s lost sales and lost revenue survey. Of the seven responding purchasers, five reported purchasing subject imports instead of the domestic like product and all five of these purchasers reported that subject imports were priced lower than the domestic like product.92 Four out of these five purchasers 87 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(ii). 88 CR/PR at V-7. The pricing data were for the following products: Product 1.--Crystalline barium chloride and Product 2.--Anhydrous barium chloride. CR/PR at V-7. 89 CR/PR at V-7. 90 CR/PR at V-7 – V-8. 91 CR/PR at Tables V-3, V-4, V-6. BassTech argues that these data are distorted by the mix of products and customers. BassTech Postconference Br. at 16-18. We note the high coverage for the pricing products and that other record evidence corroborates that subject imports were priced lower than the domestic like product, as discussed below. BassTech also challenges CPC’s reporting that ***. BassTech Postconference Br. at 18-19. CPC responded to Staff’s inquiry regarding this issue: ***. EDIS Doc. No. 763648. 92 CR/PR at Table V-9. 20 also reported that they purchased subject imports instead of the domestic like product because of lower prices. In all, the total volume of lost sales reported by these purchasers was 6.8 million pounds,93 which was equivalent to more than *** percent, of total U.S. shipments of subject imports during the POI.94 Thus, based on the record in the preliminary phase of these investigations, we find the underselling of the domestic like product by subject imports to be significant. This underselling caused the domestic industry to lose sales and market share to subject imports. Specifically, the domestic industry lost *** percentage points of market share to subject imports from 2018 to 2020. The domestic industry’s market share was lower at *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption in interim 2021 compared to *** percent in interim 2020, while the market share of subject imports was higher at *** percent in interim 2021 compared to *** percent in interim 2020.95 We also considered price trends. In general, domestic prices increased during January 2018-September 2021, while import prices fluctuated but were slightly higher in the third quarter of 2021 than the first quarter of 2018.96 Prices for the domestic like product increased by *** percent for product 1 and *** percent for product 2 between the first quarter of 2018 and the third quarter of 2021.97 Subject import prices for product 1 were *** percent higher in the third quarter of 2021 than the first quarter of 2018. There were too few instances of quarterly price data for subject imports of product 2 to analyze trends; however, we note that the price of subject imports for product 2 was *** percent higher in the third quarter of 2021 than the second quarter of 2018 (the first quarter in which import prices for product 2 were reported).98 We also considered whether subject imports prevented price increases for the domestic like product to a significant degree. The domestic industry’s unit net sales value on a per- pound basis was $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; it was $*** in interim 2020 and 93 CR/PR at Table V-9. *** reported that it purchased subject imports instead of the domestic like product and that subject imports were priced lower than the domestic like product, but it reported that its purchase of subject imports was not based on price; rather, ***. CR/PR at Table V-9. In addition, *** reported purchasing subject imports instead of the domestic like product based on price and confirmed *** pounds of lost sales, although it also reported that ***. CR/PR at V-18. 94 Calculated from CR/PR at Tables V-9, C-1. 95 CR/PR at Table C-1. 96 CR/PR at V-12 & Tables V-3, V-4, V-5. 97 CR/PR at V-12 & Tables V-3, V-4, V-5. 98 CR/PR at V-12 & Tables V-3, V-4, V-5. 21 $*** in interim 2021.99 Its unit COGS on a per-pound basis was $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; it was $*** in interim 2020 and $*** in interim 2021.100 The domestic industry’s ratio of COGS to net sales decreased from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2019 and increased to *** percent in 2020; it was *** percent in interim 2020 and *** percent in interim 2021.101 From 2018 to 2020, CPC’s unit raw material costs and unit direct labor costs increased overall, but these increases were generally offset by a decline in unit other factory costs. In interim 2021, unit other factory costs were considerably higher compared to interim 2020, while unit raw material and direct labor costs were both lower.102 As the domestic industry’s ratio of COGS to net sales reached its highest level in interim 2021, subject import market share also reached its highest level of the POI in interim 2021.103 We also observe that CPC reported that ***.104 We recognize that demand for barium chloride declined substantially during the POI, with apparent consumption falling 32.1 percent between 2018 and 2020, including a 20 percent decline between 2019 and 2020 alone, and it was 26.8 percent lower in interim 2021 compared to interim 2020, which may have impacted the domestic industry’s ability to increase prices to sufficiently cover its rising costs.105 Moreover, the domestic industry’s higher ratio of COGS to net sales in interim 2021 compared to interim 2020 was driven primarily by fixed costs being spread over a smaller production volume, leading to a cost/price squeeze.106 Although this occurred as demand declined and CPC’s net sales declined, it also occurred as subject imports continued to gain market share. In any final phase of these investigations, we will explore the extent to which subject imports may be suppressing prices for the domestic like product. Thus, based on the record in the preliminary phase of these investigations, we find that subject imports, which significantly undersold the domestic like product and gained market share at the expense of the domestic industry, had significant price effects. 99 CR/PR at Table VI-1. 100 CR/PR at Table VI-1. 101 CR/PR at Tables VI-1, C-1. 102 CR/PR at Table VI-1. Unit raw material costs were $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; they were $*** in interim 2020 and $*** in interim 2021. Unit direct labor costs were $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; they were $*** in interim 2020 and $*** in interim 2021. Unit other factory costs were $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; they were $*** in interim 2020 and $*** in interim 2021. CR/PR at Table VI-1. 103 CR/PR at Table C-1. 104 CPC Postconference Br. at 12-13; Petitions at Exhibit I-12, Attachments A, D. 105 CR/PR at Table C-1. 106 CR/PR at Tables VI-1, C-1. 22 E. Impact of the Subject Imports107 Section 771(7)(C)(iii) of the Tariff Act provides that the Commission, in examining the impact of the subject imports on the domestic industry, “shall evaluate all relevant economic factors which have a bearing on the state of the industry.” These factors include output, sales, inventories, capacity utilization, market share, employment, wages, productivity, gross profits, net profits, operating profits, cash flow, return on investment, return on capital, ability to raise capital, ability to service debt, research and development, and factors affecting domestic prices. No single factor is dispositive and all relevant factors are considered “within the context of the business cycle and conditions of competition that are distinctive to the affected industry.”108 During the POI, most of the domestic industry’s performance indicators declined. Its capacity decreased from *** pounds in 2018 and 2019 to *** pounds in 2020; it was *** pounds in interim 2020 and *** pounds in interim 2021.109 The decline in domestic production was ***. Production decreased from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019 and to *** pounds in 2020; it was lower in interim 2021 at *** pounds than in interim 2020 at *** pounds.110 As a result, the domestic industry’s capacity utilization declined from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2019 and to *** percent in 2020; it was lower in interim 2021 at *** percent than in interim 2020 at *** percent.111 CPC’s U.S. shipments decreased from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019 and to *** pounds in 2020; they were lower in interim 2021 at *** pounds than in interim 2020 at *** pounds.112 Although apparent U.S. consumption declined during this time, as discussed above, subject imports took market share from the domestic industry in the declining market. CPC’s market share declined from *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption in 2018 to *** percent in 2019 and to *** percent in 107 In its notice initiating the antidumping duty investigation, Commerce initiated the investigations based on an estimated dumping margin of 233.34 percent. Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 87 Fed. Reg. 7100 (Feb. 8, 2022). 108 19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)(iii). This provision was amended by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 (“TPEA”), Pub. L. 114-27. 109 CR/PR at Table C-1. 110 CR/PR at Table C-1. Thus, the domestic industry’s production declined *** percent from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percent lower in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 111 CR/PR at Table C-1. Accordingly, the domestic industry’s capacity utilization declined *** percentage points from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percentage points lower in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 112 CR/PR at Table C-1. Thus, CPC’s U.S. shipments declined *** percent from 2018 to 2020 and were *** percent lower in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 23 2020; it was lower in interim 2021 at *** percent than in interim 2020 at *** percent.113 CPC’s ending inventories increased overall during the POI, initially decreasing from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019 before increasing to *** pounds in 2020; ending inventories were *** pounds in interim 2020 and *** pounds in interim 2021.114 Most of the domestic industry’s employment indicators also declined. The number of production related workers (“PRWs”) decreased from *** in 2018 to *** in 2019 and *** in 2020; the number of PRWs was *** in both interim periods. Hours worked also declined from *** in 2018 to *** in 2019 and to *** in 2020; hours worked were lower in interim 2021 at *** than in interim 2020 at ***.115 Wages paid were $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; they were lower in interim 2021 at $*** than in interim 2020 at $***.116 Productivity was *** pounds per hour in 2018, *** pounds per hour in 2019, and *** pounds per hour in 2020; productivity was *** pounds per hour in interim 2020 and *** pounds per hour in interim 2021.117 CPC’s net sales by value declined throughout the POI, decreasing from $*** in 2018 to $*** in 2019 and $*** in 2020; they were lower in interim 2021 at $*** than in interim 2020 at $***.118 Its gross profits initially increased from $*** in 2018 to $*** in 2019 before decreasing to $*** in 2020; gross profits were lower in interim 2021 at $*** than in interim 2020 at $***.119 CPC’s operating income was $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; it was lower in interim 2021 at $*** than in interim 2020 at $***.120 The ratio of operating income to net sales was *** percent in 2018, *** percent in 2019, and *** percent in 2020; it was lower in interim 2021 at *** percent than in interim 2020 at *** percent.121 Net income was $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; it was $*** in interim 2020 and $*** in interim 2021.122 The ratio of net income to net sales was *** percent in 2018, *** percent in 113 CR/PR at Table C-1. Accordingly, CPC’s market share declined *** percentage points from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percentage points lower in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 114 CR/PR at Table C-1. 115 CR/PR at Table C-1. CPC explained some differences its interim 2021 data, noting ***. CR/PR at III-15.116 CR/PR at Table C-1. 117 CR/PR at Table C-1. 118 CR/PR at Table C-1. Thus, CPC’s net sales declined *** percent from 2018 to 2020 and were *** percent lower in interim 2021 than in interim 2020. Id. 119 CR/PR at Table C-1. 120 CR/PR at Table C-1. 121 CR/PR at Table C-1. 122 CR/PR at Table C-1. In general, the higher level of net income reflects ***. In January- September 2021, the *** in the level of net income primarily reflects a ***. ***. CR/PR at VI-9 & n.25. 24 2019, and *** percent in 2020; it was *** percent in interim 2020 and *** percent in interim 2021.123 CPC’s capital expenditures were $*** in 2018, $*** in 2019, and $*** in 2020; they were $*** in interim 2020 and $*** in interim 2021.124 It did not report research and development (“R&D”) costs during the POI.125 Based on the record in the preliminary phase of these investigations, we find that the significant volume of subject imports, for which price is an important purchasing factor and which are at least moderately-to-highly substitutable with the domestic like product, universally undersold the domestic like product and took sales and market share directly from the domestic industry, during a period of declining demand. As a result, the domestic industry had fewer sales and less revenue than it otherwise would have. Consequently, for purposes of these preliminary phase determinations, we find that subject imports had a significant impact on the domestic industry.126 We have also considered other factors so as to ensure that we are not attributing injury from other factors to subject imports. As discussed above, nonsubject imports accounted for less than *** percent of the U.S. market throughout the POI and also lost market share to subject imports. Therefore, nonsubject imports cannot explain the injury to the domestic industry. In addition, we acknowledge that there was declining demand for barium chloride, which both predated and was related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We find, however, that declining demand does not fully explain the injury to the domestic industry, given that subject imports increased their market share at the direct expense of the domestic industry in the 123 CR/PR at Table C-1. 124 CR/PR at Table C-1. 125 CR/PR at Table C-1. 126 Citing the Commission’s five-year reviews on the orders regarding barium chloride from China, Chaitanya argues that the fact that the Commission noted that imports of barium chloride from India were higher priced and continued to maintain a significant presence in the U.S. market indicates that subject imports from India are not causing injury to the domestic industry. Chaitanya Postconference Br. at 15-16. We note that each investigation is sui generis. Moreover, the fact that the Commission considered imports of barium chloride from India in the context of its non-attribution analyses in the reviews regarding barium chloride from China, finding, for example, that imports of barium chloride from India would not likely prevent imports of barium chloride from China from re- entering the U.S. market in significant quantities upon revocation of the order, does not indicate or suggest that imports of barium chloride from India are necessarily not injurious to the domestic industry. Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Fifth Review), USITC Pub. 5203 (June 2021) at 22. Nor does it preclude our determination in the preliminary phase of these investigations that there is a reasonable indication that subject imports of barium chloride are a cause of material injury to the domestic industry. 25 declining market, as discussed above. Similarly, we observe that several of the domestic industry’s other trade indicators, including production and U.S. shipments, declined to a greater degree than apparent U.S. consumption.127 Respondents further argue that the domestic industry’s declines in production, shipments, and employment, were due to ***128 as well as declining demand, rather than subject imports.129 As with declines in demand, any reduction in the domestic industry’s export shipments do not explain the U.S. market share loss to subject imports. In any final phase of these investigations, we will further examine CPC’s export shipments and any role they may have played in CPC’s financial posture. As discussed above, *** was the largest purchaser during the POI and reported that its purchases of subject imports were not based on price, but rather part of its efforts to diversify its suppliers in a market with limited options, given that CPC and subject imports effectively were the only sources of barium chloride during the POI.130 We note, however, that *** was not the only purchaser of barium chloride in the U.S. market and other purchasers confirmed that the domestic industry lost sales to lower-priced subject imports, as discussed above. 127 CR/PR at Table C-1. Apparent U.S. consumption declined by *** percent from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percent lower in interim 2021 compared to interim 2020. CPC’s production declined by *** percent from 2018 to 2020 and was *** percent lower in interim 2021 compared to interim 2020. U.S. shipments, by quantity, declined by *** percent from 2018 to 2020 and were *** percent lower in interim 2021 compared to interim 2020. Id. 128 CPC’s export shipments declined from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019; it reported *** in 2020, although it reported *** pounds of export shipments in interim 2021. CR/PR at Table C-1. 129 BassTech Postconference Br. at 12, 20-21; Chaitanya Postconference Br. at 21, 29-32. Chaitanya also argues that the decline in demand in the U.S. market and declines in CPC’s exports, along with the purported high-cost structure of the domestic industry, were greater causes of injury than subject imports. Chaitanya Postconference Br. at 21, 29-32. We note that, in performing our non- attribution analysis, however, the Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfairly traded imports. SAA at 851-52 (“{T}he Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfair imports.”); Taiwan Semiconductor Industry Ass’n, 266 F.3d at 1345 (“{T}he Commission need not isolate the injury caused by other factors from injury caused by unfair imports. . . . Rather, the Commission must examine other factors to ensure that it is not attributing injury from other sources to the subject imports.” (emphasis in original)). Nor does the “by reason of” standard require that unfairly traded imports be the “principal” cause of injury or contemplate that injury from unfairly traded imports be weighed against other factors, such as nonsubject imports, which may be contributing to overall injury to an industry. S. Rep. 96-249 at 74-75; H.R. Rep. 96-317 at 47; see Nippon Steel Corp., 345 F.3d at 1381 (“an affirmative material-injury determination under the statute requires no more than a substantial-factor showing. That is, the ‘dumping’ need not be the sole or principal cause of injury”). 130 CR/PR at V-18; see also BassTech Postconference Br. at 3-4. 26 VII. Conclusion For the reasons stated above, in the preliminary phase of these investigations, we determine that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subject imports of barium chloride from India that are allegedly subsidized by the government of India and sold in the United States at less than fair value. I-1 Part I: Introduction Background These investigations result from petitions filed on January 12, 2022 with the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (“USITC” or “Commission”) by Chemical Products Corp. (“CPC” or “Petitioner”), Cartersville, Georgia, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured and threatened with material injury by reason of subsidized and less-than-fair-value (“LTFV”) imports of barium chloride from India.1 Table I-1 presents information relating to the background of these investigations.2 3 Table I-1 Barium chloride: Information relating to the background and schedule of this proceeding Effective date Action January 12, 2022 Petitions filed with Commerce and the Commission; institution of Commission investigations (87 FR 2901, January 19, 2022) February 1, 2022 Commerce’s notice of initiation of countervailing duty order (87 FR 7094, February 8, 2022) February 1, 2022 Commerce’s notice of initiation of antidumping duty order (87 FR 7100, February 8, 2022) February 2, 2022 Commission’s conference February 25, 2022 Commission’s vote February 28, 2022 Commission’s determinations March 7, 2022 Commission’s views 1 See the section entitled “The subject merchandise” in Part I of this report for a complete description of the merchandise subject in this proceeding. 2 Pertinent Federal Register notices are referenced in app. A, and may be found at the Commission’s website (www.usitc.gov). 3 A list of witnesses appearing at the Commission’s conference is presented in app. B of this report. I-2 Statutory criteria Section 771(7)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the “Act”) (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(B)) provides that in making its determinations of injury to an industry in the United States, the Commission-- shall consider (I) the volume of imports of the subject merchandise, (II) the effect of imports of that merchandise on prices in the United States for domestic like products, and (III) the impact of imports of such merchandise on domestic producers of domestic like products, but only in the context of production operations within the United States; and. . . may consider such other economic factors as are relevant to the determination regarding whether there is material injury by reason of imports. Section 771(7)(C) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(C)) further provides that--4 In evaluating the volume of imports of merchandise, the Commission shall consider whether the volume of imports of the merchandise, or any increase in that volume, either in absolute terms or relative to production or consumption in the United States is significant.. . .In evaluating the effect of imports of such merchandise on prices, the Commission shall consider whether. . .(I) there has been significant price underselling by the imported merchandise as compared with the price of domestic like products of the United States, and (II) the effect of imports of such merchandise otherwise depresses prices to a significant degree or prevents price increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree.. . . In examining the impact required to be considered under subparagraph (B)(i)(III), the Commission shall evaluate (within the context of the business cycle and conditions of competition that are distinctive to the affected industry) all relevant economic factors which have a bearing on the state of the industry in the United States, including, but not limited to. . . (I) actual and potential decline in output, sales, market share, gross profits, operating profits, net profits, ability to service debt, productivity, return on investments, return on assets, and utilization of capacity, (II) factors affecting domestic prices, (III) actual and potential negative effects on cash flow, inventories, employment, wages, growth, ability to raise capital, and investment, (IV) actual and potential negative effects on the existing development and production efforts of the domestic industry, including efforts to develop a derivative or more advanced version of the domestic like product, and (V) in {an antidumping investigation}, the magnitude of the margin of dumping. 4 Amended by PL 114-27 (as signed, June 29, 2015), Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015. I-3 In addition, Section 771(7)(J) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(J)) provides that--5 (J) EFFECT OF PROFITABILITY.—The Commission may not determine that there is no material injury or threat of material injury to an industry in the United States merely because that industry is profitable or because the performance of that industry has recently improved. Organization of report Part I of this report presents information on the subject merchandise, alleged subsidy and dumping margins, and domestic like product. Part II presents information on conditions of competition and other relevant economic factors. Part III presents information on the condition of the U.S. industry, including data on capacity, production, shipments, inventories, and employment. Parts IV and V present the volume of subject imports and pricing of domestic and imported products, respectively. Part VI presents information on the financial experience of U.S. producers. Part VII presents the statutory requirements and information obtained for use in the Commission’s consideration of the question of threat of material injury as well as information regarding nonsubject countries. Market summary Barium chloride is an inorganic chemical compound that has applications in the laboratory and industry. Barium chloride is produced and sold in two form types. In its crystalline form (BaCl 2 •2H2 O), barium chloride is primarily used as an intermediate in the production of molecular catalyst sieves; in its anhydrous form (BaCl 2 ), barium chloride is primarily used as an ingredient in heat-treating salts and metal fluxes.6 The leading U.S. producer of barium chloride is CPC, while the leading producer of barium chloride in India is ***. The leading U.S. importer of barium chloride from India is ***, while the leading importer of product from nonsubject countries (primarily China) is ***. The leading U.S. purchaser of barium chloride is ***. 5 Amended by PL 114-27 (as signed, June 29, 2015), Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015. 6 Petitions, p. I-5. See “The product” section of this report for more information on barium chloride and its different forms. I-4 Apparent U.S. consumption of barium chloride totaled approximately *** pounds ($***) in 2020. U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments of barium chloride, reported by the sole responding domestic producer CPC, totaled *** pounds ($***) in 2020 and accounted for *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption by quantity and *** percent by value. U.S. imports from the subject source totaled *** pounds ($***) in 2020 and accounted for *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption by quantity and *** percent by value. U.S. imports from nonsubject sources totaled *** pounds ($***) in 2020 and accounted for *** percent of apparent U.S. consumption by quantity and *** percent by value.7 Summary data and data sources A summary of data collected in these investigations is presented in appendix C, table C-1 and table C-2. Except as noted, U.S. industry data are based on the questionnaire response of one firm, CPC, which accounted for an estimated *** percent of U.S. production of barium chloride during 2020. U.S. import data are based on the questionnaire responses of 11 firms which are believed to have accounted for *** imports of barium chloride from all sources during 2020. Foreign producer/exporter data are based on the questionnaire response of two firms which are believed to have accounted for *** percent of U.S. imports of barium chloride from India during 2020. Seven firms submitted a response to the Commission’s lost sales lost revenue survey, and the largest purchaser, ***, accounted for *** percent of purchasers’ reported purchases and imports in 2020 and *** percent during January 2018–September 2020.8 7 Figures may not add up due to rounding errors. 8 For additional information on U.S. purchasers, please see Part V, “Last sale and lost revenue.” I-5 Previous and related investigations Barium chloride or similar merchandise has been the subject of prior antidumping duty investigations in the United States. Table I-2 presents data on previous and related title VII investigations and a discussion follows. Table I-2 Barium chloride or similar merchandise: Previous and related title VII investigations and status of the orders Instituted Investigation Number Subject Country Product Scope Commission Determination Current Status of Order 1980 731-TA-31 Federal Republic of Germany Barium carbonate Affirmative Commerce revocation of order effective 01/01/2000 (First Review). 1983 731-TA-149 China Barium chloride Affirmative Commerce continuation of order effective 06/11/2021 (Fifth Review). 1983 731-TA-150 China Barium carbonate -- Commission preliminary affirmative; Commerce final negative. Investigation terminated. 2002 731-TA-1020 China Barium carbonate Affirmative Commerce continuation of order effective 08/20/2020 (Third Review). Source: U.S. International Trade Commission publications and Federal Register notices. On October 25, 1983, CPC filed an antidumping duty petition on barium chloride from China. The Commission made a final affirmative determination,9 and Commerce subsequently issued an antidumping duty order.10 Effective June 11, 2021, Commerce issued a continuation of the antidumping duty order on barium chloride from China following a fifth five-year sunset review.11 12 9 Barium Chloride from the People’s Republic of China, Investigation No. 731-TA-149 (Final), USITC Pub 1584, October 1984. 49 FR 40675, October 17, 1984 (Commission’s final determination notice). 10 49 FR 40635, October 17, 1984. 11 Barium Chloride from China, Investigation No. 731-TA-149 (Fifth Review), USITC Pub. 5203, June 2021. 86 FR 31280, June 11, 2021 (Commerce’s continuation order). 12 The Commission’s third five-year sunset review on barium chloride from China was a full review. Barium Chloride from China, Investigation No. 731-TA-149 (Third Review), USITC Publication 4157, June 2010. All the other reviews on barium chloride from China have been expedited. I-6 The Commission has also conducted investigations on a related product, barium carbonate.13 On September 9, 1980, CPC, along with FMC Corp. and the Sherwin-Williams Co., filed an antidumping duty petition on barium carbonate from the Republic of Germany. The Commission made a final affirmative determination,14 and Commerce subsequently issued an antidumping duty order.15 Effective January 1, 2000, Commerce revoked the antidumping duty order as no domestic interested party provided a response to the notice of initiation during the first five-year sunset review.16 On October 25, 1983, CPC filed an antidumping duty petition on imports of barium carbonate from China. The Commission made a preliminary affirmative determination;17 however, Commerce made a final negative determination and the investigation was terminated.18 On September 30, 2002, CPC filed another antidumping duty petition on imports of barium carbonate from China. The Commission made a final affirmative determination,19 and Commerce subsequently issued an antidumping duty order.20 Effective August 20, 2020, Commerce issued a continuation of the antidumping duty order on barium carbonate from China following a third five-year sunset review.21 13 Barium carbonate (BaCO 3) is a heavy, odorless, white-to-cream-colored chemical produced from barite ore. Barium carbonate is sold in granular, powder, or high-purity form into two major end uses: specialty glass and brick, tile, and other ceramic goods. Demand for this specialty glass, containing reflective beads for road signage and markers, roughly tracks transportation infrastructure spending. Demand for barium carbonate for clay and ceramic goods roughly tracks housing construction. High- purity barium carbonate is used to produce ceramic capacitors and fuses. Barium Carbonate from China, Investigation No. 731-TA-1020 (Third Review), USITC Publication 5098, August 2020, pp. I-5─I-6. 14 Precipitated Barium Carbonate from the Federal Republic of Germany, Investigation No. 731-TA-31 (Final), USITC Pub. 1154, June 1981. 46 FR 32698, June 24, 1981 (Commission’s final determination notice). 15 46 FR 32864, June 25, 1981. 16 63 FR 64677, November 23, 1998. 17 Barium Chloride and Barium Carbonate (Precipitated) from the People’s Republic of China, Investigation Nos. 731-TA-149 and 150 (Preliminary), USITC Pub. 1458, December 1983. 48 FR 56449, December 21, 1983 (Commission’s preliminary determination notice). 18 49 FR 33913, August 27, 1984. 19 Barium Carbonate from China, Investigation No. 731-TA-1020 (Final), USITC Pub. 3631, September 2003. 68 FR 55653, September 26, 2003 (Commission’s final determination notice). 20 68 FR 56619, October 1, 2003. 21 Barium Carbonate from China, Investigation No. 731-TA-1020 (Third Review), USITC Pub. 5098, August 2020. 85 FR 51409, August 20, 2020 (Commerce’s continuation order). I-7 Nature and extent of alleged subsidies and sales at LTFV Alleged subsidies On February 8, 2022, Commerce published a notice in the Federal Register of the initiation of its countervailing duty investigation on barium chloride from India.22 Alleged sales at LTFV On February 8, 2022, Commerce published a notice in the Federal Register of the initiation of its antidumping duty investigation on barium chloride from India.23 Commerce’s estimated dumping margin for barium chloride from India is 233.34 percent.24 The subject merchandise Commerce’s scope In the current proceeding, Commerce has defined the scope as follows: The merchandise covered by this investigation is barium chloride, a chemical compound having the formulas BaCl 2 or BaCl 2 -2H2 O, currently classifiable under subheading 2827.39.4500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.25 22 For further information on the alleged subsidy programs see Commerce’s notice of initiation and related Countervailing Duty Initiation Checklist. 87 FR 7094, February 8, 2022. 23 87 FR 7100, February 8, 2022. 24 87 FR 7100, February 8, 2022. 25 87 FR 7094, February 8, 2022; 87 FR 7100, February 8, 2022. I-8 Tariff treatment Based upon the scope set forth by Commerce, information available to the Commission indicates that the merchandise subject to these investigations are imported under statistical reporting number 2827.39.4500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS” or “HTS”). The 2022 general rate of duty is 4.2 percent ad valorem for HTS subheading 2827.39.45. Decisions on the tariff classification and treatment of imported goods are within the authority of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The product Description and applications Barium chloride is a solid chemical compound having the formula BaCl 2 •2H2 O (if in crystalline form)26 or BaCl 2 (if in powdered, or anhydrous, form).27 28 The bulk of barium chloride is sold in the crystalline form, which is used primarily in the petroleum industry.29 The market for barium chloride is mature, without any significant new applications.30 While all parties agree that producers ensure that customers’ unique specifications are met, the parties disagree on whether these differences constitute multiple, unique grades of barium chloride.31 26 The crystalline form of barium chloride is sometimes referred to as barium chloride dihydrate. Conference transcript, p. 55 (Bourdon). 27 Petitions, p. I-5. 28 Barium chloride is considered a hazardous material and must be handled during transport as such. Conference transcript, p, 118 (Chalup). 29 Petitioner estimates that anhydrous sales represent less than 5 percent of the barium chloride market. Conference transcript, pp. 18 and 39 (Bourdon and Ingram). 30 Conference transcript, pp. 20 (Ingram) and 114 (Chalup). 31 Petitioner states that only one grade of barium chloride is produced, all via the same process. Petitioner asserts that customers’ specifications are confirmed to be met before transport, but any differences in the product are a result of quality control, not grade. Conference transcript, p. 62 (Bourdon); Petitioner’s postconference brief, pp. 4-5. Respondent Chaitanya states that it has three grades of crystalline barium chloride (technical grade, catalyst grade, and electronic grade) for different applications/customers. Respondent Chaitanya also states that these various grades result from process differences rather than raw material differences. Respondent Chaitanya’s postconference brief, pp. 10- 12, 14, 37, and exh. II, p. 45. Conference transcript, pp. 81 and 83 (Gupta). Respondent BassTech stated that both the feedstock and the process can be adjusted to meet a customer’s specifications. Conference transcript, pp. 123-124 (Chalup). GFS communicated that ***. Correspondence with ***, January 24, 2022, EDIS #761625. I-9 Crystalline barium chloride (BaCl 2 •2H2 O) is used primarily as an intermediate in the production of molecular catalyst sieves, which in turn are used in oil refinery complexes to separate out industrially useful paraxylene molecules from other mixed xylenes.32 Paraxylene is a raw material used in the production of terephthalic acid, a precursor to the polyethylene terephthalate (PET) that is used to make clothing and plastic bottles.33 Crystalline barium chloride also serves as a cleansing agent in the removal of soluble sulfates in certain chemical and water treatment processes; as a cleansing ingredient in lubricating oil additives; and as a raw material in the production of certain chemicals, pigments, and paper coatings.34 The crystalline form of barium chloride is also used as a base material for production of ink pigments and other barium intermediate products such as barium titanate and barium metaborate.35 The anhydrous form of barium chloride (BaCl 2 ) is used primarily as an ingredient in heat- treating salts and metal fluxes—molten baths used to harden metal parts, usually small specialty steel parts such as tools and dies.36 The anhydrous form is used in these applications where there cannot be any moisture because of the high temperatures involved.37 32 Petitions, p. I-5. Conference transcript, p. 14 (Bourdon). 33 Petitions, p. I-5. Conference transcript, p. 14 (Bourdon). 34 Petitions, p. I-5. Conference transcript, p. 15 (Bourdon). There was some disagreement over how pervasive the use of barium chloride is in water treatment applications and, therefore, the impact of the recently passed infrastructure bill. Compare Conference transcript, p. 40 (Waite), p. 56 (Bourdon), and Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 6, with Conference transcript, p. 118 (Chalup). 35 Petitions, p. I-6. Conference transcript, p. 15 (Bourdon). 36 Petitions, p. I-5. Conference transcript, p. 15 (Bourdon). 37 Conference transcript, p. 38 (Bourdon). I-10 Manufacturing processes CPC produces barium chloride by crushing barite ore (naturally occurring barium sulfate), mixing it with petroleum coke, and reducing it at high temperatures to barium sulfide, which is purified and dissolved in water.38 The barium sulfide solution is then reacted with hydrochloric acid to remove the byproduct hydrogen sulfide as a gas.39 When the resulting solution is evaporated, barium chloride crystals remain.40 The crystalline form is reduced to the anhydrous form by applying intense heat, which drives off the water that is molecularly bonded in the crystals (see figure I-1).41 Respondent Chaitanya claims that there are two known processes for industrial scale manufacturing of barium chloride: the one described above and another that involves ***.42 38 Petitions, p. I-6. Conference transcript, p. 15 (Bourdon). 39 Petitions, p. I-6. Conference transcript, p. 15 (Bourdon). 40 Petitions, p. I-6. Conference transcript, pp. 15-16 (Bourdon). 41 Petitions, p. I-6. 42 Respondent Chaitanya’s postconference brief, p. 14. Petitioner stated during the Conference that there was only the one production process. Conference transcript, p. 58 (Bourdon). Respondent Chaitanya uses the ***. Respondent Chaitanya’s postconference brief, p. 38. I-11 Figure I-1 Barium chloride: Manufacturing process flowchart Source: Petitions, vol. I, exh. I-1. I-12 Domestic like product issues No issues with respect to domestic like product have been raised during this proceeding. Petitioner states that there is a single domestic like product consisting of barium chloride that is like the imported barium chloride described in the scope of the Petitions.43 Respondent BassTech agrees with the definition of the domestic industry proposed in the Petitions but will take no position on the definition of the domestic like product at present.44 Respondent Chaitanya did not comment on the domestic like product in its postconference brief. 43 Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 2. The definition proposed by Petitioner in the Petitions matches Commerce’s scope. Compare Petitions, pp. I-6─I-7 to 87 FR 7094, February 8, 2022 and 87 FR 7100, February 8, 2022. 44 Respondent BassTech’s postconference brief, p. 2. II-1 Part II: Conditions of competition in the U.S. market U.S. market characteristics There are two primary forms of barium chloride – crystalline and anhydrous. The primary end use of crystalline barium chloride is as an intermediate product in the production of molecular catalyst sieves, which are used by oil refineries to separate an industrially useful product (paraxylene molecules) from other mixed xylenes.1 Crystalline barium chloride is also used as a cleansing agent in certain chemical and waste-water treatment processes, in lubricating oil additives, and as a raw material in the production of certain chemicals, pigments, and paper coatings. The anhydrous form of barium chloride is used primarily as an ingredient in heat-treating salts and metal fluxes for hardening steel.2 The market for barium chloride is mature, and the end use applications have narrowed over time. Demand for barium chloride fluctuated but generally decreased during January 2018- September 2021, driven primarily by decreases in petroleum prices and the economic downturn resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, apparent U.S. consumption in 2020 was *** percent lower than in 2018 and was *** percent lower in January-September 2021 compared to the same period in 2020. The barium chloride market is dominated by one major U.S. producer, CPC, and several importers.3 India is by far the largest import source, and *** accounted for the large majority of reported imports during January 2018-September 2021. The market share among CPC and importers fluctuated during the investigation period, but CPC accounted for a lower share of the market in 2020 compared to 2018 and a lower share of the market during January- September 2021 compared to January-September 2020, while imports from India accounted for a higher share.4 Nonsubject imports accounted for less than *** percent of domestic shipments throughout the period of investigation. 1 “Paraxylene is a raw material used in the production of terephthalic acid, a precursor to polyethylene terephthalate, or PET, which is then used downstream in the production of clothing and plastic bottles.” See also Conference transcript, p. 14, 38-39 (Bourdon). 2 Petitioner estimates that anhydrous sales represent less than 5 percent of the barium chloride market. Conference transcript, pp. 18 and 39 (Bourdon and Ingram). 3 Conference transcript, pp. 14 (Bourdon) and 22-23 (Woodings). 4 CPC accounted for *** percent of the domestic market in 2018, *** percent in 2019, *** percent in 2020, and *** percent in January-September 2021. Imports from India accounted for *** percent of the domestic market in 2018, *** percent in 2019, *** percent in 2020, and *** percent in January- September 2021. II-2 Channels of distribution U.S. producer CPC and importers of subject barium chloride sold mainly to end users throughout January 2018-September 2021, as shown in table II-1. Table II-1 Barium chloride: Share of U.S. shipments by source, channel of distribution, and period Shares in percent Source Channel 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sept 2020 Jan-Jun 2021 United States Distributor *** *** *** *** *** United States End user *** *** *** *** *** India Distributor *** *** *** *** *** India End user *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Distributor *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources End user *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Distributor *** *** *** *** *** All import sources End user *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Geographic distribution U.S. producer CPC reported selling barium chloride to ***, while importers reported selling to all contiguous regions but the Pacific Coast region (table II-2). For U.S. producer CPC, *** percent of its sales were within 100 miles of its production facility, *** percent were between 101 and 1,000 miles, and *** percent were over 1,000 miles. Importers sold *** percent within 100 miles of their U.S. points of shipment, *** percent between 101 and 1,000 miles, and *** percent over 1,000 miles. Table II-2 Barium chloride: Count of U.S. producers’ and U.S. importers’ geographic markets Region U.S. producers India Northeast *** 1 Midwest *** 4 Southeast *** 3 Central Southwest *** 2 Mountain *** 1 Pacific Coast *** 0 Other *** 0 All regions (except Other) *** 0 Reporting firms 1 9 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Other U.S. markets include AK, HI, PR, and VI. II-3 Supply and demand considerations U.S. supply Table II-3 provides a summary of the supply factors regarding barium chloride from producers in the United States and India. Table II-3 Barium chloride: Supply factors that affect the ability to increase shipments to the U.S. market, by country Quantity in pounds; ratio and share in percent; count is number of “yes” responses Factor Measure United States India Capacity 2018 Quantity *** *** Capacity 2020 Quantity *** *** Capacity utilization 2018 Ratio *** *** Capacity utilization 2020 Ratio *** *** Inventories to total shipments 2018 Ratio *** *** Inventories to total shipments 2020 Ratio *** *** Home market shipments 2020 Share *** *** Non-U.S. export market shipments 2020 Share *** *** Ability to shift production (firms reporting “yes”) Count *** of 1 *** of 2 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: U.S. producer CPC accounted for *** percent of U.S. production of barium chloride in 2020. Responding foreign producer/exporter firms accounted for *** U.S. imports of barium chloride from India during 2020. For additional information on U.S. production and of U.S. imports from India, please refer to Part I, “Summary Data and Data Sources.” Domestic production Based on available information, U.S. producers of barium chloride have the ability to respond to changes in demand with large changes in the quantity of shipments of U.S.- produced barium chloride to the U.S. market. The main contributing factors to this degree of responsiveness of supply are the availability of *** unused capacity and *** inventory, as well as ***. Factors mitigating the responsiveness of supply include ***. While CPC’s reported overall capacity decreased by *** percent between 2018 and 2020, its overall production and commercial U.S. shipments decreased by *** percent and *** percent, respectively. This contributed to *** decrease in capacity utilization over the period of investigation; CPC reported capacity utilization levels of *** II-4 percent in 2018, *** percent in 2019, *** percent in 2020, *** percent during January- September 2020, and *** percent during January-September 2021. CPC reported that *** on the same equipment that it uses to produce barium chloride, and that “***.” CPC reported *** export shipments ***, although its exports shipments *** accounted for *** percent of its total shipments ***. Subject imports from India Based on available information, producers of barium chloride in India have the ability to respond to changes in demand with large changes in the quantity of shipments to the U.S. market. The main contributing factors to this degree of responsiveness of supply are the availability of unused capacity and the ability to shift shipments from alternate markets. A factor mitigating this degree of responsiveness of supply is ***. Overall, Indian producers’ reported capacity utilization decreased *** from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2020. Indian producers reported a capacity utilization of *** percent during January-September 2021, however, and project their overall capacity utilization to continue to increase to *** percent by the end of 2022. This increase is primarily driven by increases in overall production and shipments *** during January-September 2021. Their overall production of barium chloride is projected to increase further in 2022, from *** during January-September 2021 to *** by 2022. *** reported the ability to shift shipments to other products on the same equipment as barium chloride, ***. Imports from nonsubject sources Nonsubject imports accounted for less than *** percent of total U.S. imports throughout the period of investigation. Based on questionnaire responses, the largest source of nonsubject imports during January 2018-September 2021 was *** II-5 ***.5 The largest source of nonsubject imports in 2020 was ***.6 Supply constraints Most firms (including ***) indicated that they had not experienced any supply constraints since January 1, 2018. Among the firms reporting constraints, *** reported that an increase in global demand in early 2018 ***. In its petitions, CPC indicated that overall domestic supply had decreased, stating that “the reduction in U.S. supply is consistent with the narrowing range of barium chloride uses in the U.S. market over the same time period.”7 CPC also indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic created supply chain delays within the United States.8 *** reported that ***, which led to it “***.” *** reported that current global container shortages have increased lead times from 2-3 months to almost 6-8 months, and that suppliers in India are unable to book vessels, leading to freight cost increases. U.S. demand Based on available information, the overall demand for barium chloride is likely to experience small changes in response to changes in price. The main contributing factors to this degree of responsiveness are the lack of substitutes, particularly for its largest end use application, molecular sieves in oil refining, and the apparent small share of the cost of barium chloride in this application. Demand for barium chloride also appears to be mature, with a narrowing of end use applications over time.9 5 ***. 6 CPC stated that it believes imports as reported in public import data from Mexico, the United Kingdom and Russia ***. “***.” Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2 (Responses to Questions from Commission Staff), p. 1. 7 Petitions, I-13. 8 Conference transcript, p. 33 (Ingram). 9 Petitions, p. I-12; See also Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Third Review), USITC Publication 4157, June 2010, pp. II-9–10 (“Third review publication”); Conference transcript. pp. 18 and 20 (Ingram), and 41 (Bourdon). II-6 End uses and cost share For crystalline barium chloride, the most commonly used form, the primary reported end use is as an intermediate product in the production of molecular catalyst sieves, “which in turn are used in oil refinery complexes to separate industrially useful paraxylene molecules from other mixed xylenes.”10 Paraxylene is a raw material used in the production of terephthalic acid, which is a precursor to polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (the chemical name for polyester), which is in turn used in the production of clothing fibers and plastic bottles, as well as other manufactured products.11 Crystalline barium chloride “also serves as a cleansing agent in the removal of soluble sulfates in certain chemical and water treatment processes, as a cleansing ingredient in lubricating oil additives, and as a raw material in the production of certain chemicals, pigments, and paper coatings. {It is} also used as a base material for production of ink pigments and other barium intermediate products such as barium titanate and barium metaborate. Further, {it is} used in certain environmental applications, including wastewater treatment.”12 The anhydrous form of barium chloride is used “primarily as an ingredient in heat-treating salts and metal fluxes – that is, molten baths used to harden metal parts which are usually small specialty steel parts such as tools and dies.”13 Other reported end uses include galvanizing. In the last full review on the same product from China, “most firms reported that barium chloride generally accounts for a small share of the cost of molecular sieves and a small to moderate share of the cost of its other final end-use products.”14 In the current investigation, the only reported cost share for barium chloride in any of its reported end use was in wastewater treatment, for which *** reported a cost share of 25 percent. Business cycles Most firms reported that the barium chloride market was not subject to business cycles or any distinct conditions of competition. Among the firms reporting business cycles, *** reported that the market for molecular sieves is cyclical and has been 10 Petitions, pp. 5-6. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 Third review publication, p. II-7. II-7 experiencing a downturn.15 *** reported that demand for barium chloride used as a catalyst in paraxylene sequestering is impacted by the price of gasoline and PET, and demand for barium chloride used for wastewater treatment is dependent on cycles in the construction industry. However, BassTech indicated that wastewater applications are generally for industrial use and that “barium chloride does not go into municipal water treatment.”16 *** reported that the market is cyclical and application specific, and that demand, price, production and capacity levels all influence demand and inventory levels for barium chloride. Demand trends In its petitions, CPC stated that demand for barium chloride “has become more closely tied to end uses in the downstream refinery industry, which is itself highly dependent on prices of petroleum products.”17 It also indicated that demand for barium chloride experienced “steep declines” in 2021 “due, in part, to falling petroleum prices and an economic downturn during 2020-21,” while BassTech testified that “demand has been steadily decreasing since 2017.”18 *** also reported that demand for barium chloride is impacted by the price of gasoline and the construction industry, which uses barium chloride in wastewater treatment. Barium chloride is also used in wastewater treatment from drilling activities, including fracking.19 Several firms also indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic, through its impact on downstream markets, also decreased demand for barium chloride beginning in 2020.20 As shown in figure II-1, the average prices for crude oil and gasoline followed similar trends. They both dipped between the end of 2018 through the beginning of 2019, remained relatively stable through the end of 2019, then decreased again and stayed at a lower level 15 See also Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2 (Responses to Questions from Commission Staff), p. 4; Conference transcript, p. 18 (Ingram) and 42 (Bourdon). 16 Conference transcript, p. 118 (Chalup). 17 Petitions, pp. I-11–12, exh. I-12. In the Commission’s expedited fifth review on the same product from China, it found that “{t}he principal use for barium chloride … is as an intermediate material for the production of molecular catalyst sieves, used by oil refinery complexes use to separate paraxylene molecules from other mixed xylenes. Consequently, the Commission expected petroleum prices to affect demand for barium chloride.” Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Fifth Review), USITC Publication 5203, June 2021, p. 11 (“Fifth review publication”). 18 Petitions, pp. I-8 and I-14; Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 6; Conference transcript, p. 113 (Chalup). 19 Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 6 and exh. 2 (Responses to Questions from Commission Staff), p. 8. 20 Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 7. II-8 through most of 2020. At the end of 2020, crude oil and gasoline prices began recovering, and continued this recovery throughout 2021. Figure II-1 Oil and gasoline prices: Cushing, OK crude oil future contract 1-4 (average) price, dollars per barrel, and U.S. regular all formulations retail gasoline prices, dollars per gallon, monthly, January 2018–January 2022 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/weekly/, retrieved February 5, 2022. As shown in figure II-2, mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction increased in 2018, decreased slightly but remained relatively steady throughout 2019, then increased again before decreasing substantially in the beginning of 2020. Since mid-2020, mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction has increased, but by December 2021 was still lower than levels shown in 2018. The Producer Price Index for oil and gas drilling wells remained generally stable throughout the period of investigation. $0.00 $0.50 $1.00 $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 $3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $0.00 $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00 $60.00 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Gasoline (dollars per gallon) Crude oil (dollars per barrel) Crude oil future contract price Retail gasoline price II-9 Figure II-2 Industrial drilling production and price indexes: Industrial production: Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction: Drilling oil and gas wells (NAICS = 213111), not seasonally adjusted, and Producer Price Index by industry: Drilling oil and gas wells: Primary services, not seasonally adjusted, Index Jan 2018=100, monthly, January 2018–December 2021 Source: St. Louis Federal Reserve Economic Data, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IPN213111N# and https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCU213111213111P, retrieved February 10, 2022. As shown in figure II-3, construction spending generally decreased through 2018, then steadily increased throughout 2019. At the beginning of 2020, construction spending decreased again, but began increasing again by mid-2020, showing steady growth through 2021. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2018 2019 2020 2021 January 2018 = 100 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction Oil and Gas Drilling Wells PPI II-10 Figure II-3 Construction spending: Total construction spending in the United States, seasonally adjusted annual rate, trillions of dollars, monthly, January 2018–December 2021 Source: St. Louis Federal Reserve Economic Data, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TTLCONS, retrieved February 9, 2022. Most firms reported either no change or a decrease in U.S. demand for barium chloride since January 1, 2018 (table II-4). Table II-4 Barium chloride: Count of firms’ responses regarding overall domestic and foreign demand Market Firm type Increase No change Decrease Fluctuate Domestic demand U.S. producers *** *** *** *** Domestic demand Importers 0 4 2 1 Foreign demand U.S. producers *** *** *** *** Foreign demand Importers 0 2 1 0 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. *** reported that there was a temporary decline in the need for plastics and polyester due to the COVID-19 pandemic. *** that molecular sieve production is a cyclical market that has been on a downturn. *** reported that better quality salts used in the production of chlor alkali in the United States reduced the demand for barium chloride in this application. *** stated that one former user of barium chloride for use in its ink pigments, ***, started producing overseas and therefore eliminated its domestic demand for barium chloride. BassTech testified that “there was a considerable decrease in the demand for barium chloride for wastewater treatment… {related to} the suspension of $1.2 $1.3 $1.4 $1.5 $1.6 $1.7 2018 2019 2020 2021 Trillions of dollars Total construction spending II-11 construction projects due to the {COVID-19} pandemic.”21 *** reported that it lost an account and so its individual demand for barium chloride was reduced. Substitute products Most firms reported that there are no substitutes for barium chloride, though two firms (***) reported that barium hydroxide can be a substitute in water treatment applications. *** reported that the price of this substitute did not affect the price for barium chloride. Substitutability issues This section assesses the degree to which U.S.-produced barium chloride and imports of barium chloride from the subject country can be substituted for one another by examining the importance of certain purchasing factors and the comparability of barium chloride from domestic and imported sources based on those factors. Based on available data, staff believes that there is at least a moderate-to-high degree of substitutability between domestically produced barium chloride and barium chloride imported from India.22 Factors contributing to this level of substitutability include similar quality and availability for barium chloride sold from inventory, at least some interchangeability between domestic and subject sources, and the importance that price plays as a purchase factor. Factors reducing substitutability may include different lead times between the United States and India, and the potential influence of purchaser preferences for diverse supply sources. Factors affecting purchasing decisions Most important purchase factors Purchasers responding to lost sales lost revenue allegations23 were asked to identify the main purchasing factors their firm considered in their purchasing decisions for barium chloride. 21 Conference transcript, p. 80 (Chalup). 22 The degree of substitution between domestic and imported barium chloride depends upon the extent of product differentiation between the domestic and imported products and reflects how easily purchasers can switch from domestically produced barium chloride to the barium chloride imported from subject countries (or vice versa) when prices change. The degree of substitution may include such factors as relative prices (discounts/rebates), quality differences (e.g., grade standards, defect rates, etc.), and differences in sales conditions (e.g., lead times between order and delivery dates, reliability of supply, product services, etc.). 23 This information is compiled from responses by purchasers identified by the Petitioner to the lost sales lost revenue allegations. See Part V for additional information. II-12 The major purchasing factors identified by firms included overall price/cost, quality, availability, specifications, the need for multiple suppliers, relationship/trust, consistency of supply, and meeting customer expectations.24 The most often cited top three factors firms consider in their purchasing decisions for barium chloride were price/cost (cited by 8 firms), availability/ability to supply (5 firms), and quality (3 firms) (table II-5). Availability was the most frequently cited first-most important factor (cited by 3 firms), followed by quality (2 firms). Price/cost was the most frequently reported second-most factor (cited by 5 firms) and third-most important factor (cited by 2 firms). Table II-5 Barium chloride: Count of ranking of factors used in purchasing decisions as reported by purchasers, by factor Factor First Second Third Total Price/cost 1 5 2 8 Availability/ability to supply 3 1 1 5 Quality 2 --- 1 3 All other factors 1 1 2 4 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Other factors included the need for multiple suppliers (mentioned by 2 firms); and the product meets customers’ expectations, specifications, relationship/trust, and consistency of supply (1 firm each). Lead times Barium chloride is primarily sold from inventory. U.S. producer CPC reported that *** percent of its barium chloride is sold from its inventory, with an average lead time of *** days, while importers reported that *** percent of their barium chloride is sold from inventory, with average lead times of *** days. Importers also reported that *** percent of their commercial shipments were sold out of foreign producers’ inventories, with average lead 24 CPC argues that there are no specialized grades of barium chloride, and that “while each customer may have its own specification… they’re easily met by general production.” Petitioner’s postconference brief, pp. 4-5; Conference transcript, p. 47 (Bourdon). Chaitanya states that it has three grades of crystalline barium chloride (technical grade, catalyst grade, and electronic grade) for different applications/customers. Chaitanya also states that these various grades result from process differences rather than raw material differences. Respondent Chaitanya’s postconference brief, pp. 10-12, 14, and 37; Conference transcript, pp. 81 and 83 (Gupta). BassTech argues that quality and reliability are important purchase factors, as “specifications and quality vary between customers,” and “specialty product is sold {based} on quality, not price.” BassTech testified that Honeywell only began purchasing from BassTech “after working with Chaitanya Chemicals in India for years to develop its required quality.” Respondent BassTech’s postconference brief, pp. 3, 6 and exh. 1, pp. 1-3 and atts. 1-3; Conference transcript, pp. 77-78 (Chalup), 93 (Pope), and 105-109 and 115 (Chalup). II-13 times of *** days, and *** percent was produced-to-order, with an average lead time of *** days. Comparison of U.S.-produced and imported barium chloride In order to determine whether U.S.-produced barium chloride can generally be used in the same applications as imports from India and other countries, U.S. producers and importers were asked whether the products can always, frequently, sometimes, or never be used interchangeably. As shown in tables II-6 and II-7, U.S. producer CPC reported that domestically manufactured barium chloride and barium chloride from India *** be used interchangeably. Most importers reported that domestic barium chloride and barium chloride from India can sometimes be used interchangeably. Table II-6 Barium chloride: Count of U.S. producers reporting the interchangeability between barium chloride produced in the United States and in other countries, by country pair Country pair Always Frequently Sometimes Never U.S. vs. India *** *** *** *** U.S. vs. Other *** *** *** *** India vs. Other *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Table II-7 Barium chloride: Count of importers reporting the interchangeability between barium chloride produced in the United States and in other countries, by country pair Country pair Always Frequently Sometimes Never U.S. vs. India 1 1 4 0 U.S. vs. Other 1 1 1 0 India vs. Other 1 1 2 0 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. In further comments, *** reported that interchangeability between barium chloride from the United States and India depends on the production method, and that “***.” BassTech also testified that trace levels of impurities such as Sodium (Na) or Sulfur (S) may preclude the use of barium chloride for catalyst performance or water treatment applications.25 *** reported that logistical and lead time differences can make domestic product more attractive, and that importing chemicals “is a challenge.” *** reported that interchangeability depends on end user specifications, and *** reported that quality differences could limit interchangeability. 25 Conference transcript, pp. 79 and 105-109 (Chalup). II-14 In addition, U.S. producers and importers were asked to assess how often differences other than price were significant in sales of barium chloride from the United States, subject, or nonsubject countries. As seen in table II-8, CPC reported that differences other than price are *** significant when comparing domestically manufactured barium chloride with that from India and other sources. As seen in table II-9, most importers reported that differences other than price were sometimes significant for all comparisons. Table II-8 Barium chloride: Count of U.S. producers reporting the significance of differences other than price between barium chloride produced in the United States and in other countries, by country pair Country pair Always Frequently Sometimes Never U.S. vs. India *** *** *** *** U.S. vs. Other *** *** *** *** India vs. Other *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Table II-9 Barium chloride: Count of importers reporting the significance of differences between barium chloride produced in the United States and in other countries, by country pair Country pair Always Frequently Sometimes Never U.S. vs. India 1 0 3 1 U.S. vs. Other 0 0 2 1 India vs. Other 0 0 2 1 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. *** further commented on the role of non-price factors thusly: “***.” III-1 Part III: U.S. producer’s production, shipments, and employment The Commission analyzes a number of factors in making injury determinations (see 19 U.S.C. §§ 1677(7)(B) and 1677(7)(C)). Information on the subsidies and dumping margins was presented in Part I of this report and information on the volume and pricing of imports of the subject merchandise is presented in Part IV and Part V. Information on the other factors specified is presented in this section and/or Part VI and (except as noted) is based on the questionnaire response of one firm that accounted for an estimated *** percent of U.S. production of barium chloride during 2020. U.S. producers The Commission issued a U.S. producer questionnaire to six companies that were identified in the petitions, industry research, and previous and related title VII investigations on barium chloride.1 One firm, CPC, provided usable data on its operations.2 Based on all available information, staff estimates that CPC accounted for *** percent of U.S. production of barium chloride during 2020.3 4 5 6 1 A U.S. producer questionnaire was issued to: (1) Alfa Aesar by Thermo Fisher Scientific (“Alfa”); (2) Barium & Chemicals, Inc. (“B&C”); (3) CPC (i.e., Petitioner); (4) GFS Chemicals, Inc. (“GFS”); (5) Global Tungsten & Powders Corporation (“GTP”); and (6) Osram Sylvania (“Osram”). 2 CPC asserts that it is the sole remaining commercial producer of barium chloride in the United States. Petitions, p. I-3; Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 9. 3 CPC notes that other companies may produce small amounts of barium chloride for their internal consumption. Petitions, p. I-3. 4 GFS did not formally submit a U.S. producer questionnaire. However, it communicated that ***. GFS reported that ***. Correspondence with ***, January 24, 2022, EDIS #761625. 5 *** reported sourcing barium chloride from CPC, Tilley Co. (“Tilley”), and Spectrum Chemical Mfg. Corp. (“Spectrum”). Industry research shows that Tilley is a U.S. distributor of chemicals including barium chloride. Spectrum describes itself as chemical manufacturing company in the United States. As of the writing of this report, staff have not been able to reach Spectrum to confirm if it is a U.S. producer of barium chloride. 6 Based on all available information, staff believe that CPC accounted for *** percent of barium chloride production during 2020 and that the remaining production is accounted for by ***. III-2 Table III-I presents CPC’s position on the petitions, production location, and share of total production. Table III-1 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC, its position on the petitions, location of production, and share of reported production, 2020 Shares in percent Firm Position on AD & CVD petitions Production location Share of production CPC Petitioner Cartersville, GA *** All firms -- -- *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. CPC reported that ***. ***, CPC noted that it purchased barium chloride from two ***.7 7 See the “U.S. producers’ imports and purchases” section of this report for more information. III-3 Table III-2 presents CPC’s reported changes in operations since January 1, 2018. CPC reported ***. CPC noted that the COVID-19 pandemic had ***. CPC explains that ***. The pandemic, CPC notes, ***. Table III-2 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's reported changes in operations, since January 1, 2018 Item Narrative response on changes in operations Prolonged shutdowns or curtailments *** Revised labor agreements *** Other *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. III-4 U.S. production, capacity, and capacity utilization Table III-3 and figure III-1 present CPC’s production, capacity, and capacity utilization. CPC’s capacity, production, and, consequently, utilization rate declined between 2018 and 2020. Capacity was unchanged at *** pounds during 2018-19. It was *** pounds in 2020, a decline of *** percent from 2019. Capacity during January–September 2021 (“interim 2021”) was higher than during January–September 2020 (“interim 2020”). Production was reported to be *** pounds in 2018, *** pounds in 2019, and *** pounds in 2020. This represents a decline of *** percent from 2018 to 2019,8 followed by an additional drop of *** percent from 2019 to 2020, for an overall decrease of *** percent during 2018-20. Interim 2021 data implied further declines in production as it was lower than reported production in interim 2020. Capacity utilization followed decreasing capacity and production. The utilization rate was *** percent in 2018, *** percent in 2019, and *** percent in 2020, a decline of *** percentage points between 2018 and 2020. The interim 2021 utilization rate (*** percent) was lower as compared to the rate in interim 2020 (*** percent). Table III-3 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's average production capacity, production, and capacity utilization, by period Capacity and production in 1,000 pounds, capacity utilization in percent Item 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Capacity *** *** *** *** *** Production *** *** *** *** *** Capacity utilization *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. 8 *** reported that ***. III-5 Figure III-1 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's average production capacity, production, and capacity utilization, by period * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Alternative products CPC reported that ***.9 Table III-4 presents CPC’s production of barium chloride by its two different form types,10 as well as production of alternative products. 9 CPC reported that ***. 10 For more information on barium chloride and its two different form types—crystalline barium chloride and anhydrous barium chloride—see “The product” section in Part I of this report. III-6 Table III-4 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's overall capacity and production on the same equipment as subject production, by period Quantities in 1,000 pounds; Shares and ratios in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Overall capacity Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Crystalline barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Anhydrous barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: All barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Barium carbonate Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Other products Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: All out-of-scope products Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Total Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Overall capacity utilization Ratio *** *** *** *** *** Production: Crystalline barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: Anhydrous barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: All barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: Barium carbonate Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: Other products Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: All out-of-scope products Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: Total Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. III-7 U.S. producer’s U.S. shipments and exports Table III-5 presents CPC’s U.S. shipments, export shipments, and total shipments. CPC’s domestic shipments, exports, and, consequently, total shipments all declined during the period of investigation (“POI”). The data show that CPC is primarily focused on domestic shipments. CPC did, however, report export shipments.11 During the POI, CPC’s exports accounted for between *** and *** percent of total shipments by quantity.12 In terms of unit value, the unit value of CPC’s U.S. shipments was higher as compared to the unit value of its exports. During the POI, the unit value of CPC’s U.S. shipments ranged between $*** and $*** per pound, while the unit value of its exports ranged between $*** and $*** per pound. Table III-5 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's total shipments, by destination and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Value in 1,000 dollars; Unit values in dollars per pound; Shares in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 U.S. shipments Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Export shipments Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Total shipments Quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Value *** *** *** *** *** Export shipments Value *** *** *** *** *** Total shipments Value *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Export shipments Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Total shipments Unit value *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** Export shipments Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** Total shipments Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Share of value *** *** *** *** *** Export shipments Share of value *** *** *** *** *** Total shipments Share of value *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. 11 CPC reported that it exports barium chloride to ***. 12 CPC reported ***. III-8 Table III-6 presents CPC’s U.S. shipments by the type of shipment. As previously noted, CPC asserts that it is the sole remaining commercial producer of barium chloride in the United States.13 The data show that CPC’s domestic commercial shipments declined during the POI. CPC shipped *** pounds in 2018, *** pounds in 2019, and *** pounds in 2020, a decline of *** percent during 2018-2020. CPC’s interim 2021 domestic commercial shipments were *** percent lower than in interim 2020. CPC reported *** related firms. It did, however, report internal consumption.14 CPC’s share of internal consumption to U.S. shipments, by quantity, increased over the POI; however, this is a result of more significant declines in commercial U.S. shipments, as internal consumption actually decreased *** percent during 2018-20. Internal consumption was slightly higher in interim 2021 as comparted to interim 2020. 13 Petitions, p. I-3; Petitioner’s postconference brief, p. 9. 14 CPC noted that its “***.” For more information, see the “Captive consumption” section of Part III of this report. III-9 Table III-6 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's U.S. shipments, by type and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Value in 1,000 dollars; Unit values in dollars per pound; Shares in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Commercial U.S. shipments Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Internal consumption Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Transfers to related firms Quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Commercial U.S. shipments Value *** *** *** *** *** Internal consumption Value *** *** *** *** *** Transfers to related firms Value *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Value *** *** *** *** *** Commercial U.S. shipments Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Internal consumption Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Transfers to related firms Unit value *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Commercial U.S. shipments Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** Internal consumption Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** Transfers to related firms Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** Commercial U.S. shipments Share of value *** *** *** *** *** Internal consumption Share of value *** *** *** *** *** Transfers to related firms Share of value *** *** *** *** *** U.S. shipments Share of value *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. III-10 As previously noted, there are two different form types of barium chloride—crystalline barium chloride and anhydrous barium chloride. Table III-7 presents CPC’s U.S. shipments by form type. The data show that CPC is primarily focused on shipments of ***. During the POI, the share of CPC’s U.S. shipments by quantity of *** ranged between *** and *** percent. Table III-7 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's U.S. shipments, by product type and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Shares in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Crystalline Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Anhydrous Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Other Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All product types Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Crystalline Share *** *** *** *** *** Anhydrous Share *** *** *** *** *** Other Share *** *** *** *** *** All product types Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. Captive consumption Section 771(7)(C)(iv) of the Act states that–15 If domestic producers internally transfer significant production of the domestic like product for the production of a downstream article and sell significant production of the domestic like product in the merchant market, and the Commission finds that– (I) the domestic like product produced that is internally transferred for processing into that downstream article does not enter the merchant market for the domestic like product, (II) the domestic like product is the predominant material input in the production of that downstream article, and then the Commission, in determining market share and the factors affecting financial performance . . ., shall focus primarily on the merchant market for the domestic like product. 15 Amended by PL 114-27 (as signed, June 29, 2015), Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015. III-11 Transfers and sales As reported in table III-6 above, internal consumption accounted for between *** and *** percent of CPC’s U.S. shipments of barium chloride during the POI. First statutory criterion in captive consumption The first requirement for application of the captive consumption provision is that the domestic like product that is internally transferred for processing into that downstream article not enter the merchant market for the domestic like product. CPC reported internal consumption of barium chloride ***. As shown in table III-8, the barium chloride CPC internally consumed ***. Table III-8 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's internal consumptions and transfers, by period and use Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Shares in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Sold as is Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Used to produce downstream products Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All internal consumption and transfers Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Sold as is Share *** *** *** *** *** Used to produce downstream products Share *** *** *** *** *** All internal consumption and transfers Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. III-12 Second statutory criterion in captive consumption The second criterion of the captive consumption provision concerns whether the domestic like product is the predominant material input in the production of the downstream article that is captively produced. With respect to the downstream articles resulting from captive production, barium chloride reportedly comprises *** percent of CPC’s finished value/costs of downstream products and *** percent of its total inputs (table III-9). Table III-9 Barium chloride: U.S. producers' share of inputs into downstream products Shares in percent Material input Share of value/cost Share of total inputs Barium chloride *** *** Other inputs *** *** All material inputs *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. III-13 U.S. producer’s inventories Table III-10 presents CPC’s end-of-period inventories and the ratio of these inventories to its production, U.S. shipments, and total shipments. CPC’s inventories increased irregularly during 2018-20. CPC held *** pounds in inventories in 2018, they decreased to *** pounds in 2019, but then increased to *** in 2020, for a total increase of *** percent during 2018-20. Inventories were higher in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020. All of CPC’s end-of-period inventory ratios increased during 2018-20. The interim 2021 ratios were higher as compared to the ratios in interim 2020. In interim 2021, the inventory to U.S. production ratio and the inventory to U.S. shipments ratio ***.16 Table III-10 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's inventories and their ratio to select items, by period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Inventory ratios in percent Item 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 End-of-period inventory quantity *** *** *** *** *** Inventory ratio to U.S. production *** *** *** *** *** Inventory ratio to U.S. shipments *** *** *** *** *** Inventory ratio to total shipments *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. 16 CPC’s interim 2021 end-of-period inventories ***. In its questionnaire response, CPC noted that “***.” III-14 U.S. producer’s imports and purchases As noted above, CPC *** is a purchaser of barium chloride from two ***.17 Table III-11 presents CPC’s production, as well as its purchases of imports and the overall imports from the relevant subject importers. Table III-11 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's U.S. production, U.S. purchases of imports and the overall imports from the relevant subject importers, by period Quantity in 1,000 pounds Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 U.S. production Quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. purchases of imports from India (imported by ***) Quantity *** *** *** *** *** *** U.S. imports from India Quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. purchases of imports from India (imported by ***) Quantity *** *** *** *** *** *** U.S. imports from India Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. ***. 17 CPC reported that “***.” III-15 U.S. employment, wages, and productivity Table III-12 presents CPC’s employment-related data. Table III-12 Barium chloride: U.S. producer CPC's employment related information, by item and period Item 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Production and related workers (PRWs) (number) *** *** *** *** *** Total hours worked (1,000 hours) *** *** *** *** *** Hours worked per PRW (hours) *** *** *** *** *** Wages paid ($1,000) *** *** *** *** *** Hourly wages (dollars per hour) *** *** *** *** *** Productivity (pounds per hour) *** *** *** *** *** Unit labor costs (dollars per pound) *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. The number of production and related workers (PRWs), total hours worked, and hours worked per PRW decreased during 2018-20. Wages paid decreased *** percent between 2018 and 2020, but hourly wages increased *** percent during the same timeframe. Productivity decreased irregularly during 2018-20. Productivity was *** pounds per hour in 2018, it then decreased to *** pounds per hour in 2019, but then increased to *** pounds per hour in 2020. Interim 2021 data is inconsistent with data reported in interim 2020 and during 2018- 20. CPC explained: ***. IV-1 Part IV: U.S. imports, apparent U.S. consumption, and market shares U.S. importers The Commission issued importer questionnaires to 23 firms1 believed to be importers of barium chloride under HTSUS subheading 2827.39.45, as well as to all identified U.S. producers of barium chloride.2 Usable questionnaire responses were received from 11 firms, representing *** imports of barium chloride from all sources during 2020.3 4 Table IV-1 lists all responding U.S. importers of barium chloride from India and other sources, their locations, and their shares of U.S. imports, in 2020. 1 These firms were identified in the petitions, industry research, and previous and related title VII investigations on barium chloride. 2 See Part III of this report for a discussion on U.S. producers and the domestic industry. 3 During 2020, official Commerce statistics showed that 4.1 million pounds of barium chloride from India and 5,375 pounds of barium chloride from nonsubject sources entered the United States under HTSUS subheading 2827.39.45 (see app. D of this report). The 11 firms which submitted a U.S. importer questionnaire to the Commission reported that they imported *** pounds of barium chloride from India and *** pounds of barium chloride from nonsubject sources in 2020. These firms therefore accounted for *** percent of imports of barium chloride from India and *** percent of imports of barium chloride from nonsubject sources during 2020. 4 There are indications that there are additional U.S. importers of barium chloride: • ***. • ***. • ***. IV-2 Table IV-1 Barium chloride: U.S. importers, their headquarters, and share of total imports within a given source by firm, in 2020 Share in percent Firm Headquarters India Nonsubject sources All import sources BassTech Fort Lee, NJ *** *** *** Brenntag Mid-South Henderson, KY *** *** *** CDN Warrenville, IL *** *** *** Connell San Francisco, CA *** *** *** Fermaz Austin, TX *** *** *** QualChem Beasley, TX *** *** *** Skyhawk Houston, TX *** *** *** Skyline Riverside, CA *** *** *** Sojitz New York, NY *** *** *** Sun Parsippany, NJ *** *** *** Wego Great Neck, NY *** *** *** All firms Various *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. IV-3 U.S. imports Table IV-2 and figure IV-1 present data for U.S. imports of barium chloride from India and all other sources. The majority of imports of barium chloride are imported from the subject country. Imports of barium chloride from nonsubject sources, by quantity, ranged between *** and *** percent of total imports during the POI. Imports of barium chloride from India decreased irregularly throughout the POI. Imports of subject merchandise declined from *** pounds in 2018 to *** pounds in 2019, a decrease of *** percent.5 These imports, however, rose to *** pounds in 2020, an increase of *** percent. Overall, imports of barium chloride from India decreased *** percent during 2018-20. The unit value of imports from India was relatively steady throughout the POI, ranging between $*** and $*** per pound. The unit value of nonsubject imports increased from $*** per pound in 2018 to $*** per pound in 2020, which represented a *** percent increase during 2018-20. The unit value of nonsubject imports was higher in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020. The ratio of imports from nonsubject sources to U.S. production was relatively steady throughout the POI, ranging between *** and *** percent. The ratio of imports from India to U.S. production increased from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2020, an increase of *** percentage points during 2018-20. The ratio of imports from India to U.S. production in interim 2021 was higher as compared to the ratio in interim 2020. 5 BassTech and Brenntag Mid-South accounted for *** percent of the decrease in subject imports during 2018-19. Brenntag Mid-South, which accounted for *** percent of the decrease, ***. BassTech, which accounted for *** percent of the decrease, reported that its importation of and subsequent sales of barium chloride are “lumpy” and not linear. It noted that its principal purchaser, Honeywell UOP, “split the business between CPC and BassTech.” Respondent BassTech’s postconference brief, exh. 1, p. 3; exh. 1, att. 5. ***. Id. at exh. 1, p.3. IV-4 Table IV-2 Barium chloride: U.S. imports, by source and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Value in 1,000 dollars; Unit values in dollars per pound; Shares and ratios in percent; Ratios represent the ratio to U.S. production Source Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 India Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** India Value *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Value *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Value *** *** *** *** *** India Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Unit value *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Unit value *** *** *** *** *** India Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Share of quantity *** *** *** *** *** India Share of value *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Share of value *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Share of value *** *** *** *** *** India Ratio *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Ratio *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Ratio *** *** *** *** *** Table continued. Table IV-2 continued Barium chloride: U.S. imports, by source and by period Change in percent Source Measure 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 Jan-Sep 2020-21 India Quantity ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** Nonsubject sources Quantity ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** All import sources Quantity ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** India Value ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** Nonsubject sources Value ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** All import sources Value ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** India Unit value ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Nonsubject sources Unit value ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** All import sources Unit value ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. Period changes preceded by a “▲” represent an increase, while period changes preceded by a “▼” represent a decrease. IV-5 Figure IV-1 Barium chloride: U.S. import quantities and average unit values, by source and period * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. IV-6 U.S. shipments of imports Table IV-3 presents U.S. shipments of imports differentiated by product type.6 The data show that U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of anhydrous barium chloride were relatively small.7 The share of U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of anhydrous barium chloride ranged between *** and *** percent during the POI. U.S. importers’ U.S. shipment of crystalline barium chloride were comparably larger but declined over the POI. These shipments were *** pounds in 2018, *** pounds in 2019, and *** pounds 2020, a decrease of *** percent during 2018-20. U.S. importers’ U.S. shipment of crystalline barium chloride were lower in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020. U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments of other barium chloride, by contrast, increased during 2018-20. The share of these shipments increased from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2020. The share was higher in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020.8 Table IV-3 Barium chloride: U.S. importers' U.S. shipments of imports from India, by product type and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; shares in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Crystalline barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Anhydrous barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Other Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All product types Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Crystalline barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Anhydrous barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Other Share *** *** *** *** *** All product types Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. 6 As previously noted, there are two different form types of barium chloride—crystalline barium chloride and anhydrous barium chloride. See “The product” section of this report for more information. 7 Petitioner estimates that anhydrous sales represent less than 5 percent of the barium chloride market. Conference transcript, pp. 18 and 39 (Bourdon and Ingram). 8 Three U.S. importers provided data on their U.S. shipments of other barium chloride. All three firms listed “barium chloride dihydrate” as other. Petitioner notes that barium chloride dihydrate is the same as crystalline barium chloride. Conference transcript, pp. 54-56 (Bourdon). However, staff chose not to modify or change importers’ responses with regards to their reported U.S. shipments of other barium chloride. If the data for other barium chloride is added to the data for crystalline barium chloride, then U.S. importers’ U.S shipments of crystalline barium chloride only declined by *** percent during 2018-20. IV-7 Negligibility The statute requires that an investigation be terminated without an injury determination if imports of the subject merchandise are found to be negligible.9 Negligible imports are generally defined in the Act, as amended, as imports from a country of merchandise corresponding to a domestic like product where such imports account for less than 3 percent of the volume of all such merchandise imported into the United States in the most recent 12-month period for which data are available that precedes the filing of the petition or the initiation of the investigation. However, if there are imports of such merchandise from a number of countries subject to investigations initiated on the same day that individually account for less than 3 percent of the total volume of the subject merchandise, and if the imports from those countries collectively account for more than 7 percent of the volume of all such merchandise imported into the United States during the applicable 12-month period, then imports from such countries are deemed not to be negligible.10 Imports from India accounted for *** percent of total imports of barium chloride by quantity during January 2021 through December 2021 (table IV-4). Table IV-4 Barium chloride: U.S. imports in the twelve-month period preceding the filing of the petitions, January 2021 through December 2021 Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Share of quantity in percent Source of imports Quantity Share of quantity India *** *** Nonsubject sources *** *** All import sources *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. 9 Sections 703(a)(1), 705(b)(1), 733(a)(1), and 735(b)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. §§ 1671b(a)(1), 1671d(b)(1), 1673b(a)(1), and 1673d(b)(1)). 10 Section 771 (24) of the Act (19 U.S.C § 1677(24)). IV-8 Apparent U.S. consumption of the total market Information on apparent U.S. consumption of the total market is presented in this section. U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments and U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments are inclusive of commercial shipments, internal consumption, and transfers.11 12 Based on quantity Table IV-5 and figure IV-2 present data on apparent U.S. consumption of the total market and U.S. market shares by quantity for barium chloride. Apparent consumption from all sources, and consequently total apparent consumption, declined during 2018-20. U.S. producers’ market share was at *** percent in 2018, it decreased to *** percent in 2019, and then further decreased to *** percent in 2020, a decline of *** percentage points during 2018-20. U.S. producers’ market share was lower in interim 2021 (*** percent) as compared to interim 2020 (*** percent). As U.S. producers’ market share decreased, India’s market share increased. India’s share was at *** percent in 2018, it increased to *** percent in 2019, and then further increased to *** percent in 2020, an increase of *** percentage points during 2018-20. India’s market share was higher in interim 2021 (*** percent) as compared to interim 2020 (*** percent). The market share of nonsubject sources was *** percent throughout the POI. 11 U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments represents the data reported by CPC, the sole responding U.S. producers. CPC noted *** internal consumption. See the “Captive consumption” section of Part III for more information. Given CPC’s captive consumption, merchant market data is presented below and in app. C, table C-2. 12 U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments do not include data on internal consumption, as no U.S. importer reported internal consumption. ***. IV-9 Table IV-5 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. total market consumption and market shares based on quantity data, by source and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Shares in percent Source Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 U.S. producers Quantity *** *** *** *** *** India Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. producers Share *** *** *** *** *** India Share *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All sources Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. Figure IV-2 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. total market consumption based on quantity data, by source and period * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. IV-10 Based on value Table IV-6 and figure IV-3 present data on apparent U.S. consumption of the total market and U.S. market shares by value for barium chloride. The trends for apparent U.S. consumption of the total market by value follow the trends for apparent U.S. consumption of the total market by quantity discussed above. Table IV-6 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. total market consumption and market shares based on value data, by source and period Value in 1,000 dollars; shares in percent Source Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 U.S. producers Value *** *** *** *** *** India Value *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Value *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Value *** *** *** *** *** All sources Value *** *** *** *** *** U.S. producers Share *** *** *** *** *** India Share *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All sources Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. IV-11 Figure IV-3 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. total market consumption based on value data, by source and period * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. IV-12 Apparent U.S. consumption of the merchant market As previously noted, the domestic industry is a captive consumer of barium chloride.13 As a result, data on apparent U.S. consumption of the merchant market is presented in this section.14 U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments include only commercial shipments, while U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments are inclusive of commercial shipments, internal consumption, and transfers.15 16 Based on quantity Table IV-7 and figure IV-4 present data on apparent U.S. consumption of the merchant market and U.S. market shares by quantity for barium chloride. Apparent consumption from all sources, and consequently total apparent consumption, declined during 2018-20. U.S. producers’ market share was at *** percent in 2018, it decreased to *** percent in 2019, and then further decreased to *** percent in 2020, a decline of *** percentage points during 2018-20. U.S. producers’ market share was lower in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020. As U.S. producers’ market share decreased, India’s market share increased. India’s share was at *** percent in 2018, it increased to *** percent in 2019, and then further increased to *** percent in 2020, an increase of *** percentage points during 2018-20. India’s market share was higher in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020. The market share of nonsubject sources was *** percent throughout the POI. 13 See the “Captive consumption” section of Part III of this report for more information. 14 App. C, table C-2 contains additional information on the merchant market. 15 As previously noted, CPC is the only firm to submit a U.S. producer questionnaire to the Commission. 16 U.S. importers’ U.S. shipments do not include data on internal consumption, as no U.S. importer reported internal consumption. ***. IV-13 Table IV-7 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. merchant market consumption and shares, based on quantity, by source and by period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Shares in percent Source Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 U.S. producers Quantity *** *** *** *** *** India Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** All sources Quantity *** *** *** *** *** U.S. producers Share *** *** *** *** *** India Share *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All sources Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Figure IV-4 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. merchant market consumption and shares, based on quantity, by source and by period * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. IV-14 Based on value Table IV-8 and figure IV-5 present data on apparent U.S. consumption of the merchant market and U.S. market shares by value for barium chloride. The trends for apparent U.S. consumption of the merchant market by value follow the trends for apparent U.S. consumption of the merchant market by quantity discussed above. Table IV-8 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. merchant market consumption and market shares based on value data, by source and period Value in 1,000 dollars; shares in percent Source Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 U.S. producers Value *** *** *** *** *** India Value *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Value *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Value *** *** *** *** *** All sources Value *** *** *** *** *** U.S. producers Share *** *** *** *** *** India Share *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubject sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All import sources Share *** *** *** *** *** All sources Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. IV-15 Figure IV-5 Barium chloride: Apparent U.S. merchant market consumption based on value data, by source and period * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. V-1 Part V: Pricing data Factors affecting prices Raw material costs Domestic barium chloride is produced by crushing barite ore, mixing it with petroleum coke, and reacting it with hydrochloric acid in order to remove the byproduct hydrogen sulfide as a gas.1 “When the resulting solution is evaporated, barium chloride crystals remain,” which forms the crystalline form of barium chloride. To form anhydrous barium chloride, the crystalline form is reduced “by applying intense heat, which drives off the water that is molecularly bonded in the crystals.”2 CPC’s raw materials as a share of COGS increased from *** percent in 2018 to *** percent in 2020, and was *** percent in January-September 2021.3 As shown in figure V-1, the average unit values (AUVs) for imports of ground natural barium sulfate (barite ore, or baryte) from China, Mexico, Morocco, and Vietnam varied throughout January 2018-December 2021, with the AUVs from Morocco showing a large spike in February 2019, and the AUVs from China and Vietnam showing the greatest variation over the period.4 The greatest volume of imports of barium sulfate came from China, while the least came from Vietnam. As shown in figure V-2, the producer price index of petroleum and coke products including coke oven products generally increased from the beginning of 2018 to mid-2018, then decreased through then end of 2020, then increased intermittently through the end of 2021. 1 Petitions, p. I-6; Conference transcript, pp. 15-16 (Bourdon). 2 Ibid. 3 CPC reported that “***.” Petitions, p. I-18. 4 In its postconference brief, CPC provided its cost data for barite ore, petroleum coke, and hydrochloric acid. It indicated that ***, and that it “***.” CPC indicated that for its coke, it has a “***,” and that ***. For its hydrochloric acid, it ***. See Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2 (Responses to Questions from Commission Staff) at att. A, and exh. 3 (Responses to Questions from Commission Staff via Email). V-2 Figure V-1 Baryte imports: Average unit values and quantities of imports of ground barium natural barium sulfate (barytes) from China, Mexico, Morocco, and Vietnam, monthly, January 2018–December 2021 Source: USITC Dataweb, HTS statistical reporting number 2511.10.1000, accessed February 10, 2022. $- $0.01 $0.02 $0.03 $0.04 $0.05 $0.06 $0.07 $0.08 $0.09 $0.10 2018 2019 2020 2021 Dollars per pound China Mexico Morocco Vietnam 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2018 2019 2020 2021 Millions of pounds China Mexico Morocco Vietnam V-3 Figure V-2 Petroleum coke: Producer Price Index by Commodity: Fuels and Related Products and Power: Other Petroleum and Coal Products, Including Coke Oven Products, Not Elsewhere Classified, Monthly, Not Seasonally Adjusted, January 2018–December 2021 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU058103, retrieved February 10, 2022. As shown in figure V-3, the prices for inorganic acids (including hydrochloric acid) were generally stable throughout 2018 before decreasing in 2019 and 2020 and increasing again in 2021. 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 2018 2019 2020 2021 January 2018 = 100 Other Petroleum and Coal Products V-4 Figure V-3 Inorganic acids: Producer Price Index by Commodity: Chemicals and Allied Products: Inorganic Acids, including Hydrochloric Acid, Sulfuric Acid, and Others, Monthly, Not Seasonally Adjusted, January 2018-December 2021 Source: FRED, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU0613020T#0, retrieved February 7, 2022. Energy costs As shown in figure V-4, the average industrial retail price of electricity in the United States remained fairly stable throughout the period of investigation, with the most volatility during the beginning of 2021. 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 2018 2019 2020 2021 January 2018 = 100 PPI for Inorganic Acids V-5 Figure V-4 Electricity price: Average retail industrial price of electricity in the United States, monthly, January 2018-November 2021 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/7?agg=2, retrieved February 7, 2022. Transportation costs to the U.S. market Transportation costs for barium chloride shipped from India to the United States averaged 15 percent during 2020. These estimates were derived from official import data and represent the transportation and other charges on imports.5 U.S. inland transportation costs Almost all responding firms (including ***) reported that they typically arrange transportation to their customers. Only one firm, ***, reported that its customers typically arrange transportation. U.S. producer CPC ***, while importers reported inland transportation costs ranging from 2 percent to 20 percent, for a simple average of 7.6 percent. 5 The estimated transportation costs were obtained by subtracting the customs value from the c.i.f. value of the imports for 2020 and then dividing by the customs value based on the HTS statistical reporting number 2827.39.4500. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2018 2019 2020 2021 Cents per Kilowatthour Industrial cost of electricity V-6 Pricing practices Pricing methods As shown in table V-1, U.S. producer CPC reported setting prices ***. Most importers reported setting prices using transaction-by-transaction negotiations, though one firm (***) reported also using contracts, and another firm (***) reported setting prices based on “market value.” Table V-1 Barium chloride: U.S. producers’ and importers’ reported price setting methods, count Method U.S. producers Importers Transaction-by-transaction *** 10 Contract *** 1 Set price list *** 0 Other *** 1 Responding firms 1 11 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: The sum of responses down may not add up to the total number of responding firms as each firm was instructed to check all applicable price setting methods employed. U.S. producer CPC reported selling *** of its barium chloride under *** contract, and the remaining amount in the spot market (table V-2). All six responding importers reported selling in the spot market, while *** reported selling via *** contract. Cumulatively, importers reported selling ***, roughly ***, and the remaining amount in the spot market. Table V-2 Barium chloride: U.S. producers’ and importers’ shares of U.S. commercial shipments by type of sale, 2020 Share in percent Type of sale U.S. producers Importers Long-term contracts *** *** Annual contracts *** *** Short-term contracts *** *** Spot sales *** *** Total 100.0 100.0 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown. U.S. producer CPC reported that ***. ***. Even V-7 though *** reported selling by short-term contract in 2020, importers reported that their short term-contracts typically averaged “30-60” days. Three importers reported that for these contracts, prices could not be renegotiated during the contract period, the contracts fixed both price and quantity, and the contracts were not indexed to raw material costs. For both annual and long-term contracts, *** reported that ***. ***. No firm identified any indexes used in its contract sales. Sales terms and discounts Most firms, including ***, typically quote prices on a delivered basis. *** also reported quoting prices on an f.o.b. basis, and *** reported quoting prices on both a delivered and f.o.b. basis. In terms of discounts, CPC reported ***. Most importers reported having no specific discount policy, though two firms (***) offer quantity discounts, and one firm (***) offers discounts on total volume purchased. Price data The Commission requested U.S. producers and importers to provide quarterly data for the total quantity and f.o.b. value of the following barium chloride products shipped to unrelated U.S. customers during January 2018-September 2021. Product 1.--Crystalline barium chloride Product 2.--Anhydrous barium chloride U.S. producer CPC and nine importers provided usable pricing data for sales of the requested products, although not all firms reported pricing for all products for all quarters.6 Pricing data reported by these firms accounted for approximately *** percent of U.S. 6 Per-unit pricing data are calculated from total quantity and total value data provided by U.S. producers and importers. The precision and variation of these figures may be affected by rounding, limited quantities, and producer or importer estimates. V-8 producers’ U.S. shipments of barium chloride and *** percent of U.S. shipments of subject imports from India in 2020.7 Price data for products 1 and 2 are presented in tables V-3 to V-4 and figures V-5 to V-6. Table V-3 Barium chloride: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported product 1 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarter, January 2018-September 2021 Price in dollars per pound, quantity in pounds (dry weight), margin in percent. Period U.S. price U.S. quantity India price India quantity India margin 2018 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2018 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2018 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** 2018 Q4 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q4 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q4 *** *** *** *** *** 2021 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2021 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2021 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Product 1: Crystalline barium chloride. 7 Pricing coverage is based on U.S. shipments reported in questionnaires. ***. V-9 Table V-4 Barium chloride: Weighted-average f.o.b. prices and quantities of domestic and imported product 2 and margins of underselling/(overselling), by quarter, January 2018-September 2021 Price in dollars per pound, quantity in pounds (dry weight), margin in percent. Period US price US quantity India price India quantity India margin 2018 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2018 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2018 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** 2018 Q4 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** 2019 Q4 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** 2020 Q4 *** *** *** *** *** 2021 Q1 *** *** *** *** *** 2021 Q2 *** *** *** *** *** 2021 Q3 *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Product 2: Anhydrous barium chloride. V-10 Figure V-5 Barium chloride: Weighted-average prices and quantities of domestic and imported product 1, by quarter, January 2018-September 2021 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Product 1: Crystalline barium chloride. V-11 Figure V-6 Barium chloride: Weighted-average prices and quantities of domestic and imported product 2, by quarter, January 2018-September 2021 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Product 2: Anhydrous barium chloride. V-12 Price trends In general, domestic prices increased during January 2018-September 2021, while import prices fluctuated but were slightly higher in the third quarter of 2021 than the first quarter of 2018. Table V-5 summarizes the price trends, by country and by product. As shown in the table, domestic prices increased by *** percent for product 1 and *** percent for product 2 between the first quarter of 2018 and the third quarter of 2021. Import prices were *** percent higher in the third quarter of 2021 than the first quarter of 2018 for product 1. There were too few instances of quarterly price data for subject imported product 2 to make a trend analysis, though the price of subject imports for product 2 in the third quarter of 2021 was *** percent higher than the second quarter of 2018 (the first quarter in which import prices for product 2 were reported). Table V-5 Barium chloride: Summary of price data, by product and source Volume in pounds (dry weight), price in dollars per pound Product Source Number of quarters Quantity Low price High price First quarter price Last quarter price Percent change over period Product 1 United States *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Product 1 India *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Product 2 United States *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Product 2 India *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Percent change column is percentage change from the first quarter 2018 to the last quarter in 2021. As shown in figure V-7, prices for domestic product 1 remained relatively stable until the fourth quarter of 2020, at which point prices increased by more than ***, and ended up *** percent higher at the end of the period than the beginning of the period. Subject import prices for product 1 remained comparatively more stable throughout the period of investigation. V-13 Figure V-7 Barium chloride: Indexed U.S. producer and importer prices, by quarter, January 2018-September 2021 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0 Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep 2018 2019 2020 2021 Indexed prices (Jan.-Mar. 2018 = 100.0) U.S. producers Product 1 Product 2 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0 Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep 2018 2019 2020 2021 Indexed prices (Jan.-Mar. 2018 = 100.0) Subject U.S. importers Product 1 V-14 Price comparisons As shown in table V-6, prices for barium chloride imported from India were below those for U.S.-produced product in all 22 instances (approximately *** pounds). The margin of underselling for product 1 was *** percent, and the margin of underselling for product 2 was *** percent, for a total combined average margin of 30.6 percent. There were no quarterly instances of overselling. Table V-6 Barium chloride: Instances of underselling and overselling and the range and average of margins, by product Quantity in 1,000 pounds; margin in percent Product Type Number of quarters Quantity Average margin Min margin Max margin Product 1 Underselling *** *** *** *** *** Product 2 Underselling *** *** *** *** *** Total Underselling 22 *** 30.6 9.0 62.5 Product 1 Overselling --- --- --- --- --- Product 2 Overselling --- --- --- --- --- Total Overselling --- --- --- --- --- Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: These data include only quarters in which there is a comparison between the U.S. and subject product. Lost sales and lost revenue The Commission requested that U.S. producers of barium chloride report purchasers with which they experienced instances of lost sales or revenue due to competition from imports of barium chloride from India during January 2018-September 2021. The responding U.S. producer, CPC, reported that since January 1, 2018 ***. CPC ***, and in those allegations identified five firms with which it lost sales, ***. CPC identified one firm with which it lost revenue: ***. Staff contacted eight purchasers and received responses from seven purchasers.8 Responding purchasers reported purchasing approximately *** million pounds of barium chloride during January 2018-September 2021 (table V-7). 8 The Commission received responses from ***. V-15 Table V-7 Barium chloride: Purchasers’ reported purchases and imports, by firm and by source, January 2018-September 2021 Quantity in 1,000 pounds, change in shares in percentage points Purchaser Domestic quantity Subject quantity All other quantity Change in domestic share Change in subject country share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** All firms *** *** *** ▼(14.3) ▲14.9 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: The ‘all other’ category includes nonsubject sources and unknown sources. Changes in shares represent the share of the firm’s total purchases of domestic and/or subject country imports between first and last years and are presented in percentage points. Period changes preceded by a “▲” represent an increase, while period changes preceded by a “▼” represent a decrease. During 2020, responding purchasers purchased and imported 34.0 percent from U.S. producers, 65.9 percent from India, and less than percent from nonsubject and “unknown source” countries. Purchasers were asked about changes in their purchasing patterns from different sources since 2018. Of the responding purchasers, three reported decreasing purchases from domestic producers, none reported increasing such purchases, one reported no change, one reported fluctuating purchases, and one did not purchase any domestic product (table V-8).9 One purchaser reported decreasing purchases of Indian barium chloride, two reported increasing such purchases, one reported no change, one reported fluctuating purchases, and one did not purchase any domestic product. 9 Of the seven responding purchasers, one purchaser (***) indicated that it did not know the source of the barium chloride it purchased. It identified the suppliers for these purchases as ***. As noted above, ***. V-16 Table V-8 Barium chloride: Count of changes in reported purchase patterns from the United States, subject, and nonsubject sources Count in number of reporting firms Source of purchases Decreased Increased Constant Fluctuated Did not purchase United States 3 0 1 1 1 India 1 2 1 1 1 All other sources 1 0 0 0 3 Sources unknown 0 0 0 0 3 Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Explanations for decreasing purchases of domestic product included non-competitive domestic pricing, a lack of availability in 2019 and price, and a decrease in overall demand for end products in the global market due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Explanations for increasing purchases of imports from India included more competitive pricing, increased customer demand, and lower pricing on barium chloride sourced from India. The sole explanation for decreasing purchases of imports from India was a decrease in overall demand for end products in the global market due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the seven responding purchasers, five reported that, since 2018, they had purchased imported barium chloride from India instead of U.S.-produced product. All five of these purchasers reported that subject import prices were lower than U.S.-produced product, and four of them reported that price was a primary reason for the decision to purchase imported product rather than U.S.-produced product. All four of these purchasers estimated the quantity of barium chloride from India purchased instead of domestic product; quantities ranged from *** pounds to *** million pounds, for a total of 6.8 million pounds (table V-9).10 The sole purchaser that identified non-price reasons for purchasing imported rather than U.S.-produced product (***), reported a desire to not be sole-sourced in order to have more security of supply. 10 Petitioner CPC argues that it had experienced “numerous instances of lost sales and lost revenue as the result of unfair competition from dumped and subsidized imports of subject merchandise from India, {and that} altogether, such losses approximated $*** during the period of investigation.” Petitions, p. I-23. V-17 Table V-9 Barium chloride: Purchasers’ responses to purchasing subject imports instead of domestic product, by firm Quantity in 1,000 pounds Purchaser Purchased subject imports instead of domestic Imports priced lower Choice based on price Quantity Explanation *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** All firms Yes--5; No--2 Yes--5; No--0 Yes--4; No--1 6,826 NA Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Of the six responding purchasers, none reported that U.S. producers had reduced prices in order to compete with lower-priced imports from India, while four reported that they had not; two reported that they did not know (table V-10). Table V-10 Barium chloride: Purchasers’ responses to U.S. producer price reductions, by firm Count in number of firms reporting; price reductions in percent Purchaser Reported producers lowered prices Estimated percent of U.S. price reduction Explanation *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Total / average Yes--0; No--4; Don't Know--2 *** NA Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. V-18 In responding to the lost sales lost revenue survey, some purchasers provided additional information. *** reported the following: “***.” *** reported the following: “***.” *** reported the following: “***.” VI-1 Part VI: Financial experience of the U.S. producer Background1 A single U.S. producer, CPC, reported financial results and related information on its U.S. barium chloride manufacturing operations. CPC’s barium chloride operations are conducted as part of its barium business unit, which also includes the production and sale of other barium- related products.2 With regard to changes in its barium chloride operations during the period, CPC reported that ***.3 ***.4 ***.5 Operations on Barium chloride Table VI-1 and table VI-2 present income-and-loss data for the U.S. producer’s barium chloride operations and corresponding changes in average per pound values (AUVs), respectively.6 1 The following abbreviations may be used in the tables and/or text of this section: generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), fiscal year (“FY”), net sales (“NS”), cost of goods sold (“COGS”), selling, general, and administrative expenses (“SG&A expenses”), average unit values (“AUVs”), research and development expenses (“R&D expenses”), and return on assets (“ROA”). 2 Conference transcript, p. 45 (McCall). CPC, a privately held company, reported its financial results based on U.S. GAAP and on a calendar-year basis. Conference transcript, pp. 13-14 (Bourdon). CPC U.S. producer questionnaire responses to question III-2. 3 CPC U.S. producer questionnaire response to II-2a. 4 Email with attachment from Counsel of behalf of CPC to USITC staff, February 7, 2022. With regard to how specific aspects of CPC’s barium chloride production were affected ***. Ibid. 5 CPC U.S. producer questionnaire response to II-2a. Email with attachment from Counsel of behalf of CPC to USITC staff, February 7, 2022. 6 The Commission’s variance analysis is generally more meaningful when product mix remains the same throughout the period. While barium chloride, as a physical product, is not highly differentiated, (continued...) VI-2 Table VI-1 Barium chloride: Results of total market operations of U.S. producer CPC, by item and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; value in 1,000 dollars; ratios in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Total net sales Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Total net sales Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Value *** *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) Value *** *** *** *** *** SG&A expenses Value *** *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) Value *** *** *** *** *** Interest expense Value *** *** *** *** *** All other expenses Value *** *** *** *** *** All other income Value *** *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) Value *** *** *** *** *** Depreciation/amortization Value *** *** *** *** *** Estimated cash flow from operations Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** SG&A expenses Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** Table continued. CPC indicated that there are differences among customers in terms of product specifications. Conference transcript, pp. 47-48 (Ingram, Bourdon). With regard to how average per pound barium chloride sales value may have been impacted by changes in customer mix during the period, CPC reported that ***. Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2, p. 5. As noted below, CPC’s commercial export sales to ***. While barium chloride product mix, in a traditional sense, may not have changed substantially during the period, changes in CPC’s *** to reduce the utility of a variance analysis. Accordingly, a variance analysis is not presented here. VI-3 Table VI-1 continued Barium chloride: Results of total market operations of the U.S. producer CPC, by item and period Shares in percent; unit values in dollars per pound; count in number of firms reporting Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 COGS: Raw materials Share *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Share *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Share *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Share *** *** *** *** *** Total net sales Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) Unit value *** *** *** *** *** SG&A expenses Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Operating losses Count *** *** *** *** *** Net losses Count *** *** *** *** *** Data Count *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Ratios represent the ratio to net sales value and shares represent the share of COGS. Table VI-2 Barium chloride: Changes in U.S. producer CPC’s total market AUVs between comparison periods Changes in percent Item 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 Jan-Sep 2020-21 Total net sales *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory *** *** *** *** COGS: Total *** *** *** *** Table continued. VI-4 Table VI-2 continued Barium chloride: Changes in U.S. producer CPC’s total market AUVs between comparison periods Changes in dollars per pound Item 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 Jan-Sep 2020-21 Total net sales *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory *** *** *** *** COGS: Total *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) *** *** *** *** SG&A expenses *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---”. Period changes preceded by a “▲” represent an increase, while period changes preceded by a “▼” represent a decrease. Net sales Barium chloride sales *** represent commercial sales (*** percent of total sales value) with internal consumption (*** percent) accounting for the remainder.7 *** transfer sales to related firms were reported. Given the *** of commercial sales, a single line item for sales is presented in the relevant tables above.8 9 7 CPC’s barium chloride internal consumption supports downstream production of ***. CPC U.S. producer questionnaire response to II-11a (note 1). CPC’s average per pound value of internal consumption ranged from *** percent (January-September 2021) to *** percent (2018) of corresponding average commercial sales value. ***. Email with attachment from Counsel on behalf of CPC to USITC staff, February 7, 2022. 8 While commercial sales *** reflect U.S. sales, export sales, ***, accounted for a relatively large share in 2018, *** during the full-year period to *** in 2020, and then *** in January-September 2021. Barium chloride export sales accounted for *** percent of commercial sales (value basis) in 2018, *** percent in 2019, *** percent in 2020, and *** percent in January-September 2021. 9 Appendix G presents the U.S. producer’s financial results specific to merchant market operations. VI-5 Quantity On an overall basis, barium chloride sales quantity declined throughout the period with *** categories of commercial sales (U.S. commercial sales and exports) declining during the full- year period with the decline in exports *** on a percentage basis. In contrast and while the quantity of internal consumption fluctuated (***), these fluctuations had a *** impact on the directional pattern of overall barium chloride sales quantity given internal consumption’s relatively *** share. In January-September 2021, exports ***, having declined to *** in 2020, while U.S. commercial sales quantity was *** percent lower in January-September 2021 compared to January-September 2020. Overall commercial sales quantity (combined U.S. and export commercial sales) was *** percent lower in January-September 2021 compared to January- September 2020. With regard to the pattern of its export sales in general, CPC stated ***.10 Value On an overall basis, barium chloride average per pound sales value increased throughout the period (see table VI-2).11 Since average commercial export sales value was *** compared to corresponding U.S. commercial sales value, the *** in export sales quantity noted above effectively *** in overall average sales value during the full-year period. Conversely, *** in January-September 2021, they dampened the overall *** in average sales value.12 As shown in table VI-2, changes in overall average sales value and average raw material cost were directionally the same during only parts of the period, which is generally consistent 10 Ibid. 11 Average sales values for U.S. commercial sales and export sales *** increased during the period. The *** subcategory of barium chloride whose average value declined during the period was internal consumption, which was *** lower on an average per pound basis in January-September 2021 compared to January-June 2020. 12 ***. Ibid. VI-6 with the reported absence of a direct (or formulaic) passthrough of the primary raw material cost in sales value.13 Cost of goods sold and gross profit or loss Raw materials Total barium chloride raw material costs reflect barite ore (*** percent of 2020 raw material cost), followed by hydrochloric acid (*** percent), petroleum coke (*** percent), and other material inputs (collectively accounting for *** percent.14 15 As noted previously, barium sulfide solution is produced with processed barite ore and petroleum coke that serves as the feedstock for both barium chloride and barium carbonate and represents the first primary step to produce barium chloride. The second primary step is the reaction of the barium sulfide solution with hydrochloric acid, followed by evaporation (to produce barium chloride crystal) and a further drying step (to produce the anhydrous form of barium chloride crystal).16 For most of the period, total raw material cost was the largest component of COGS, ranging from *** percent (January-September 2021) of total COGS to *** percent (full-year and interim 2020). On an average per pound basis, raw material cost fluctuated: declining *** percent in 2019, increasing *** percent in 2020, and lower by *** percent in January- September 2021 compared to January-September 2020. 13 Conference transcript, p. 49 (McCall). 14 CPC U.S. producer questionnaire response to III-9d. Other material inputs were identified as ***. Ibid. 15 ***. CPC U.S. producer questionnaire response to III-6. ***. Email with attachment from Counsel on behalf of CPC to USITC staff, February 7, 2022. 16 Hydrogen sulfide gas is produced when barium sulfide solution is reacted with hydrochloric acid. Conference transcript, p. 15 (Bourdon). ***. Email with attachment from Counsel on behalf of CPC to USITC staff, February 7, 2022. In a response to a staff conference question regarding the cost treatment of hydrogen sulfide gas, which was referred to as a byproduct in staff conference testimony, CPC stated ***. Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2, p. 6. VI-7 Based on information submitted in its postconference brief, CPC appears to have a diversified source of supply for all of its primary inputs.17 With regard to raw material purchasing in general, a CPC company official noted that potential supply disruptions during the period were anticipated and the company adjusted its purchasing patterns to account for extended lead times.18 According to CPC, ***.19 Direct labor and other factory costs Direct labor and other factory costs were the third and second largest components of COGS, respectively, for most of the period, direct labor ranging from *** percent of total COGS (2018) to *** percent (full-year and interim 2020) and other factory costs ranging from *** percent (full-year and interim 2020) to *** percent (January-September 2021). As shown in table VI-1, the individual share of COGS accounted for by direct labor and other factory costs moved within relatively wide ranges, the fluctuations in other factory costs being more pronounced. With regard to this pattern in general, CPC stated that it ***.20 In terms of minimizing average per pound barium chloride COGS, capacity utilization was noted as a significant factor.21 Specifically, CPC stated *** 17 Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 3, pp. 2-4. ***. Ibid. 18 Conference transcript, p. 50 (McCall). 19 Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2, p. 6. ***. USITC auditor notes (preliminary-phase). 20 Ibid. ***. CPC U.S. producer questionnaire response to question III-10. Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2, p. 7. 21 Conference transcript, p. 51 (Bourdon). VI-8 ***.22 Table VI-2 shows that other factory costs on a per pound basis declined during the full- year period and then was *** percent higher in January-September 2021 compared to January- September 2020.23 In contrast, average per pound direct labor cost increased during the period and then was *** percent lower in January-September 2021 compared to January-September 2020. Gross profit or loss While remaining positive throughout the period, CPC’s barium chloride gross profit fluctuated on an absolute basis. Notwithstanding the decline in total barium chloride sales quantity and value in 2019, total gross profit increased in that year, reflecting higher average per pound sales value and lower average raw material cost and conversion costs (combined direct labor cost and other factory costs), which in turn yielded a relatively large expansion in gross profit ratio (total gross profit divided by total sales). In 2020, in conjunction with a continued decline in total sales (quantity and value) and a contraction in gross profit ratio, reflecting a larger percentage increase in average COGS than the corresponding increase in average sales value (see table VI-2), total gross profit declined.24 At the end of the period, higher average COGS in January-September 2021 compared to January-September 2020 exceeded the smaller increase in average sales value, resulting in a *** contraction in gross profit ratio, to ***. The higher average COGS in January-September 2021 reflects the previously-noted *** in average other factory costs, which more than offset the corresponding *** in average raw material cost and direct labor cost. 22 Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2, p. 7. ***. Ibid. 23 The *** average per pound other factory costs in January-September 2021 shown in table VI-1 coincides with the period’s *** level of barium chloride production and capacity utilization (see table III- 3). To the extent that barium chloride capacity utilization declined throughout the period, the reduction in average per pound other factory costs during the full-year period generally appears to reflect *** (see footnote 4). 24 With regard to the impact of COVID-19 on its financial performance in general, ***. CPC U.S. producer questionnaire response to question III-18. VI-9 SG&A expenses and operating income or loss Total SG&A expenses assigned to barium chloride operations increased to their highest full-year level in 2019, declined to their lowest level in 2020, and were lower in January- September 2021 compared to January-September 2020 (see table VI-1). While total SG&A expenses were somewhat higher in 2019, the relatively large increase in corresponding SG&A expense ratio (total SG&A expenses divided by total sales) primarily reflects the decline in total sales value. Similarly and notwithstanding the decline in total SG&A expenses in 2020, the SG&A expense ratio’s further increase in that year, to its highest level of the period, reflects a continued decline in total sales value. While the SG&A expense ratio was at its lowest level in 2018, it exceeded the corresponding gross profit ratio, resulting in an operating loss. In contrast, the gross profit ratio’s previously-noted expansion in 2019 more than offset the increase in SG&A expense ratio, yielding operating income. In conjunction with a contraction in gross profit ratio, to a level *** than corresponding SG&A expense ratio, 2020 operating profit was ***. In January- September 2021 compared to January-September, the transition back to an operating loss primarily reflects the gross profit ratio’s contraction to ***. Interest expense, other expenses and income, and net income or loss Directionally, barium chloride operating and net results shared the same pattern in terms of relative improvement in 2019, followed by decline in 2020. In contrast, the pattern diverged at the end of the period with operating results declining to a loss in January- September 2021, while net income was *** higher in January-September 2021 compared to January-September 2020. In general, the higher level of net income, which was positive throughout the period, reflects ***. In January-September 2021, the *** in the level of net income primarily reflects a ***.25 25 ***. Email with attachment from Counsel on behalf of CPC to USITC staff, February 7, 2022. VI-10 Capital expenditures, R&D expenses, total net assets and return on assets Table VI-3 presents the U.S. producer’s capital expenditures, R&D expenses, total net assets and corresponding ROA, respectively.26 Table VI-4 presents corresponding narrative descriptions of the U.S. producer’s capital expenditures and R&D expenses. Table VI-3 Barium chloride: Capital expenditures, R&D expenses, net assets, and ROA of the U.S. producer CPC, by period Value in 1,000 dollars Item 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Capital expenditures *** *** *** *** *** R&D expenses *** *** *** *** *** Net assets *** *** *** *** *** Return on assets *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Table VI-4 Barium chloride: Narrative descriptions of the U.S. producer CPC’s capital expenditures and R&D expenses Firm Narrative Capital expenditures *** R&D expenses *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Capital and investment The Commission requested the U.S. producer to describe any actual or potential negative effects of imports of barium chloride from India on its growth, investment, ability to raise capital, development and production efforts, or the scale of capital investments. Table VI-5 presents the effects reported and table VI-6 provides the U.S. producer’s narrative descriptions. 26 ROA is calculated here as operating income divided by total assets. With respect to a company’s overall operations, staff notes that a total asset value (i.e., the bottom line value on the asset side of a company’s balance sheet) reflects an aggregation of a number of current and non-current assets, which, in many instances, are not product specific. The ability of a U.S. producer to assign total asset values to discrete product lines affects the meaningfulness of calculated operating return on net assets. VI-11 Table VI-5 Barium chloride: Count indicating actual and anticipated negative effects of imports from subject sources on investment, growth, and development since January 1, 2018, by effect Number of firms reporting Effect Category Count Cancellation, postponement, or rejection of expansion projects Investment *** Denial or rejection of investment proposal Investment *** Reduction in the size of capital investments Investment *** Return on specific investments negatively impacted Investment *** Other investment effects Investment *** Any negative effects on investment Investment *** Rejection of bank loans Growth *** Lowering of credit rating Growth *** Problem related to the issue of stocks or bonds Growth *** Ability to service debt Growth *** Other growth and development effects Growth *** Any negative effects on growth and development Growth *** Anticipated negative effects of imports Future *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Table VI-6 Barium chloride: Narratives relating to actual and anticipated negative effects of imports on investment, growth, and development, since January 1, 2018 Item Firm name and accompanying narrative response *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. VII-1 Part VII: Threat considerations and information on nonsubject countries Section 771(7)(F)(i) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(i)) provides that— In determining whether an industry in the United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports (or sales for importation) of the subject merchandise, the Commission shall consider, among other relevant economic factors1-- (I) if a countervailable subsidy is involved, such information as may be presented to it by the administering authority as to the nature of the subsidy (particularly as to whether the countervailable subsidy is a subsidy described in Article 3 or 6.1 of the Subsidies Agreement), and whether imports of the subject merchandise are likely to increase, (II) any existing unused production capacity or imminent, substantial increase in production capacity in the exporting country indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports of the subject merchandise into the United States, taking into account the availability of other export markets to absorb any additional exports, (III) a significant rate of increase of the volume or market penetration of imports of the subject merchandise indicating the likelihood of substantially increased imports, (IV) whether imports of the subject merchandise are entering at prices that are likely to have a significant depressing or suppressing effect on domestic prices, and are likely to increase demand for further imports, (V) inventories of the subject merchandise, 1 Section 771(7)(F)(ii) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(ii)) provides that “The Commission shall consider {these factors} . . . as a whole in making a determination of whether further dumped or subsidized imports are imminent and whether material injury by reason of imports would occur unless an order is issued or a suspension agreement is accepted under this title. The presence or absence of any factor which the Commission is required to consider . . . shall not necessarily give decisive guidance with respect to the determination. Such a determination may not be made on the basis of mere conjecture or supposition.” VII-2 (VI) the potential for product-shifting if production facilities in the foreign country, which can be used to produce the subject merchandise, are currently being used to produce other products, (VII) in any investigation under this title which involves imports of both a raw agricultural product (within the meaning of paragraph (4)(E)(iv)) and any product processed from such raw agricultural product, the likelihood that there will be increased imports, by reason of product shifting, if there is an affirmative determination by the Commission under section 705(b)(1) or 735(b)(1) with respect to either the raw agricultural product or the processed agricultural product (but not both), (VIII) the actual and potential negative effects on the existing development and production efforts of the domestic industry, including efforts to develop a derivative or more advanced version of the domestic like product, and (IX) any other demonstrable adverse trends that indicate the probability that there is likely to be material injury by reason of imports (or sale for importation) of the subject merchandise (whether or not it is actually being imported at the time).2 Information on the nature of the subsidies was presented earlier in this report; information on the volume and pricing of imports of the subject merchandise is presented in Parts IV and V; and information on the effects of imports of the subject merchandise on U.S. producers’ existing development and production efforts is presented in Part VI. Information on inventories of the subject merchandise; foreign producers’ operations, including the potential for “product-shifting;” any other threat indicators, if applicable; and any dumping in third- country markets, follows. Also presented in this section of the report is information obtained for consideration by the Commission on nonsubject countries. 2 Section 771(7)(F)(iii) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 1677(7)(F)(iii)) further provides that, in antidumping investigations, “. . . the Commission shall consider whether dumping in the markets of foreign countries (as evidenced by dumping findings or antidumping remedies in other WTO member markets against the same class or kind of merchandise manufactured or exported by the same party as under investigation) suggests a threat of material injury to the domestic industry.” VII-3 The industry in India The Commission issued foreign producers’ or exporters’ questionnaires to 22 firms believed to produce and/or export barium chloride from India.3 Usable responses to the Commission’s questionnaire were received from two firms: Chaitanya Chemicals (“Chaitanya”) and Shri Shanti Laboratories (“Shri Shanti”). These firms’ exports to the United States accounted for *** percent of U.S. imports of barium chloride from India in 2020.4 According to estimates requested of the responding producers in India, the production of barium chloride in India reported in questionnaires accounts for approximately *** percent of overall production of barium chloride in India.5 Table VII-1 presents information on the barium chloride operations of the responding producers and exporters in India.6 7 8 3 These firms were identified in the petitions, industry research, and previous and related title VII investigations on barium chloride. 4 Chaitanya estimated that ***. Data from responses to the U.S. importer questionnaire ***. U.S. importers reported ***. Commission staff ***. 5 Shri Shanti reported that ***. Correspondence with ***, February 1, 2022, EDIS #762319. Chaitanya ***. 6 Chaitanya reported ***. The Commission ***. The Commission also ***. 7 Shri Shanti reported ***. U.S. importer ***. Correspondence with ***, January 19, 2022, EDIS #761626. 8 Three firms responding to the U.S. importer questionnaire reported imports of barium chloride from nonsubject sources: China, Mexico, and the United Kingdom. Official U.S. import statistics show that imports of barium chloride entered the United States from nonsubject sources—Mexico, Russia, and the United Kingdom—during 2018-20. See app. D for more information. Petitioner notes, however, that to its knowledge ***. Petitioner’s postconference brief, exh. 2, p. 1. VII-4 Table VII-1 Barium chloride: Summary data for producers in India, 2020 Firm Production (1,000 pounds) Share of reported production (percent) Exports to the United States (1,000 pounds) Share of reported exports to the United States (percent) Total shipments (1,000 pounds) Share of firm's total shipments exported to the United States (percent) Chaitanya *** *** *** *** *** *** Shri Shanti *** *** *** *** *** *** All firms *** *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. Changes in operations As presented in table VII-2, producers in India reported several operational and organizational changes since January 1, 2018. Shri Shanti reported ***. Chaitanya reported ***. Chaitanya also reported ***. Table VII-2 Barium chloride: Reported changes in operations in India since January 1, 2018, by firm Item Firm name and accompanying narrative response Prolonged shutdowns or curtailments *** Revised labor agreements *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. VII-5 Operations on barium chloride Table VII-3 presents information on the barium chloride operations of the responding producers and exporters in India. Producers in India reported capacity at *** pounds during 2018-20. This figure is projected to remain the same during 2021-22. Production and, consequently, capacity utilization decreased irregularly during 2018-20. Production was *** pounds (*** percent utilization) in 2018, it increased to *** pounds (*** percent utilization) in 2019, and then decreased to *** pounds (*** percent utilization) in 2020, a decline in production of *** percent during 2018-20. Producers in India project that their production and capacity utilization will both be higher in 2021 and 2022. Producers in India are export-oriented. During 2018-20, their share of exports to total shipments ranged between *** and *** percent. Their projected share is *** percent in 2021 and *** in 2022. The ratio of producers’ exports to the United States to total shipments ranged between *** percent and *** percent during 2018-20, and it is projected to be at *** percent in 2021 and *** percent in 2022.9 End-of-period inventories for producers in India are small relative to their production and total shipments. During 2018-20, the ratio of inventories to production ranged between *** and *** percent. During the same time, the ratio of inventories to total shipments ranged between *** and *** percent. In 2021, the ratio of inventories to production and the ratio of inventories to total shipments is projected to be *** percent. In 2022, the ratio of inventories to production and the ratio of inventories to total shipments is projected to be *** percent. 9 Chaitanya reported that it ***. Respondent Chaitanya’s postconference brief, pp. 19, 29. VII-6 Table VII-3 Barium chloride: Data on industry in India, by period Quantity in 1,000 pounds Item 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Projection 2021 Projection 2022 Capacity *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Production *** *** *** *** *** *** *** End-of-period inventories *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Internal consumption *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Commercial home market shipments *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Home market shipments *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Exports to the United States *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Exports to all other markets *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Export shipments *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Total shipments *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Table continued. VII-7 Table VII-3 continued Barium chloride: Data on industry in India, by period Shares and ratios in percent Item 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Projection 2021 Projection 2022 Capacity utilization ratio *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Inventory ratio to production *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Inventory ratio to total shipments *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Internal consumption share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Commercial home market shipments share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Home market shipments share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Exports to the United States share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Exports to all other markets share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Export shipments share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Total shipments share *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. VII-8 Alternative products As previously stated, there are two different form types of barium chloride—crystalline barium chloride and anhydrous barium chloride.10 Table VII-4 presents subject producers’ production of crystalline barium chloride and anhydrous barium chloride, as well as their production of alternative products produced on the same equipment and machinery as used to produce barium chloride.11 Producers in India produced barium chloride and alternative products in relatively equal shares. The share of production of all barium chloride ranged between *** and *** percent during 2018-20, while the share of production of all out-of-scope products ranged between *** and *** percent during the same timeframe. The production of all barium chloride, as compared to the production of all out-of-scope products, was higher in both interim 2020 and interim 2021. Producers in India parallel U.S. producers in that they produce ***.12 On average, producers in India produce ***. 10 See “The product” section of this report for more information on the two form types of barium chloride. 11 Shri Shanti ***. Chaitanya reported ***. 12 See Part III, table III-7 for more information. VII-9 Table VII-4 Barium chloride: Producers in India overall capacity and production on the same equipment as subject production, by period Quantities in 1,000 pounds; Shares and ratios in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Overall capacity Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Crystalline barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Anhydrous barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: All barium chloride Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Other products Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: All out-of-scope products Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Production: Total Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Overall capacity utilization Ratio *** *** *** *** *** Production: Crystalline barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: Anhydrous barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: All barium chloride Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: Other products Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: All out-of-scope products Share *** *** *** *** *** Production: Total Share *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. Exports According to Global Trade Atlas (“GTA”), the leading export markets for barium chloride from India, by quantity, are the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. In 2020, their share of exports from India were 18.0, 14.4, and 12.4 percent, respectively. In 2020, the United States was the eighth-largest export market destination, by quantity, for barium chloride from India (4.5 percent). By value, the United States was the top export market of barium chloride from India (35.2 percent). Table VII-5 presents exports from India to its leading markets. VII-10 Table VII-5 Chlorides: Exports from India, by destination market and by period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Value in 1,000 dollars Destination market Measure 2018 2019 2020 United States Quantity 6,282 5,925 6,789 United Arab Emirates Quantity 22,935 25,138 26,799 Saudi Arabia Quantity 17,398 22,015 21,531 Kuwait Quantity 4,202 14,175 18,468 Oman Quantity 6,053 10,104 12,269 Qatar Quantity 11,360 10,916 8,350 Bahrain Quantity 7,206 8,183 7,924 Philippines Quantity 269 7,855 6,827 Malaysia Quantity 4,444 4,312 6,754 All other destination markets Quantity 29,711 36,138 33,580 All destination markets Quantity 109,859 144,761 149,292 United States Value 6,332 8,017 11,834 United Arab Emirates Value 1,328 1,328 1,412 Saudi Arabia Value 749 975 1,009 Kuwait Value 181 582 741 Oman Value 292 472 549 Qatar Value 647 637 456 Bahrain Value 505 522 498 Philippines Value 17 405 364 Malaysia Value 335 288 436 All other destination markets Value 20,529 17,442 16,357 All destination markets Value 30,916 30,667 33,656 United States Unit value 1.01 1.35 1.74 United Arab Emirates Unit value 0.06 0.05 0.05 Saudi Arabia Unit value 0.04 0.04 0.05 Kuwait Unit value 0.04 0.04 0.04 Oman Unit value 0.05 0.05 0.04 Qatar Unit value 0.06 0.06 0.05 Bahrain Unit value 0.07 0.06 0.06 Philippines Unit value 0.06 0.05 0.05 Malaysia Unit value 0.08 0.07 0.06 All other destination markets Unit value 0.69 0.48 0.49 All destination markets Unit value 0.28 0.21 0.23 Table continued. VII-11 Table VII-5 continued Chlorides: Exports from India, by destination market and by period Unit values in dollars per pound; Shares in percent Destination market Measure 2018 2019 2020 United States Share of quantity 5.7 4.1 4.5 United Arab Emirates Share of quantity 20.9 17.4 18.0 Saudi Arabia Share of quantity 15.8 15.2 14.4 Kuwait Share of quantity 3.8 9.8 12.4 Oman Share of quantity 5.5 7.0 8.2 Qatar Share of quantity 10.3 7.5 5.6 Bahrain Share of quantity 6.6 5.7 5.3 Philippines Share of quantity 0.2 5.4 4.6 Malaysia Share of quantity 4.0 3.0 4.5 All other destination markets Share of quantity 27.0 25.0 22.5 All destination markets Share of quantity 100.0 100.0 100.0 United States Share of value 20.5 26.1 35.2 United Arab Emirates Share of value 4.3 4.3 4.2 Saudi Arabia Share of value 2.4 3.2 3.0 Kuwait Share of value 0.6 1.9 2.2 Oman Share of value 0.9 1.5 1.6 Qatar Share of value 2.1 2.1 1.4 Bahrain Share of value 1.6 1.7 1.5 Philippines Share of value 0.1 1.3 1.1 Malaysia Share of value 1.1 0.9 1.3 All other destination markets Share of value 66.4 56.9 48.6 All destination markets Share of value 100.0 100.0 100.0 Source: Official exports statistics under Harmonized System (“HS”) subheading 2827.39 as reported by the Indian Ministry of Trade in the Global Trade Atlas database, accessed January 22, 2022. Note: HS subheading 2827.39 contains products outside the scope of these investigations. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. United States is shown at the top, all remaining top export destinations shown in descending order of 2020 data. VII-12 U.S. inventories of imported merchandise Table VII-6 presents data on U.S. importers’ reported inventories of barium chloride. *** reported inventories of barium chloride from nonsubject sources. U.S. importers’ inventories of subject barium chloride decreased irregularly during 2018- 20. Inventories were at *** pounds in 2018, they decreased to *** pounds in 2019, and then increased to *** pounds in 2020, a decrease of *** percent during 2018-20.13 Inventories were lower in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020. The ratio of subject inventories to imports and the ratio of subject inventories to total U.S. shipments also decreased irregularly during 2018-20. The ratio of subject inventories to imports was *** percent in 2018, it decreased to *** percent in 2019, and then increased to *** in 2020, a decline of *** percentage points during 2018-2020. The ratio of subject imports to total shipments followed a similar trend; it was *** percent in 2018, then decreased to *** percent in 2019, and then increased to *** percent in 2020, a decline of *** percentage points during 2018-20. The two ratios were lower in interim 2021 as compared to interim 2020. The ratio of inventories to subject imports was *** percent in interim 2021 and *** percent in interim 2020. The ratio of inventories to total shipments was *** percent in interim 2021 and *** percent in interim 2020. 13 BassTech, which accounted for *** percent of end-of-period inventories in 2020, reported that its importation of and subsequent sales of barium chloride are “lumpy” and not linear. It noted that its principal purchaser, Honeywell UOP, “split the business between CPC and BassTech.” Respondent BassTech’s postconference brief, exh. 1, p. 3; exh. 1, att. 5. ***. Id. at exh. 1, p. 3. VII-13 Table VII-6 Barium chloride: U.S. importers' inventories and their ratio to select items, by source and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Ratios in percent Measure Source 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Inventories quantity India *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to imports India *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to U.S. shipments of imports India *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to total shipments of imports India *** *** *** *** *** Inventories quantity Nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to imports Nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to U.S. shipments of imports Nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to total shipments of imports Nonsubject *** *** *** *** *** Inventories quantity All import sources *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to imports All import sources *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to U.S. shipments of imports All import sources *** *** *** *** *** Ratio to total shipments of imports All import sources *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. VII-14 U.S. importers’ outstanding orders The Commission requested importers to indicate whether they imported or arranged for the importation of barium chloride from India after September 30, 2021. Their reported data are presented in table VII-7. *** reported arranged imports from nonsubject sources. *** reported arranged imports from India. Table VII-7 Barium chloride: Arranged imports, by source and by period Quantity in 1,000 pounds Source Oct-Dec 2021 Jan-Mar 2022 Apr-Jun 2022 Jul-Sept 2022 Total India *** *** *** *** *** Nonsubect sources *** *** *** *** *** All import sources *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. Third-country trade actions Based on available information, barium chloride from India has not been subject to other antidumping or countervailing duty investigations outside the United States. Information on nonsubject countries Table VII-8 presents global export data for chlorides, a category that includes barium chloride and out-of-scope products, with the United States at the top and then by source in descending order of quantity for 2020. In the Commission’s fifth five-year review of the antidumping duty order on barium chloride from China, no respondent party provided a response. However, the Petitioner provided a list of 14 possible producers of barium chloride in China with an estimated capacity of 188,000 metric tons (414.5 million pounds).14 14 Barium Chloride from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-149 (Fifth Review), USITC Publication 5203, June 2021, p. I-14. VII-15 Table VII-8 Chlorides: Global exports, by reporting country and by period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; Value in 1,000 dollars Exporting country Measure 2018 2019 2020 United States Quantity 16,126 14,415 17,003 India Quantity 109,859 144,761 149,292 Germany Quantity 433,179 431,904 413,131 China Quantity 268,133 267,727 217,011 Belgium Quantity 166,725 179,218 181,528 Austria Quantity 4,710 146,783 138,913 Spain Quantity 71,794 85,196 110,098 France Quantity 73,125 91,107 106,290 Sweden Quantity 74,480 75,570 75,862 Hungary Quantity 58,962 51,274 57,812 Canada Quantity 34,648 43,994 46,179 Taiwan Quantity 30,829 44,131 38,470 All other exporters Quantity 291,743 268,677 208,611 All reporting exporters Quantity 1,634,315 1,844,757 1,760,200 United States Value 53,228 56,272 68,453 India Value 30,916 30,667 33,656 Germany Value 77,382 76,701 78,170 China Value 114,932 117,869 76,439 Belgium Value 74,464 51,369 35,505 Austria Value 1,488 9,631 9,322 Spain Value 18,108 17,177 19,642 France Value 6,957 10,755 10,829 Sweden Value 4,628 4,771 4,936 Hungary Value 2,383 2,287 2,714 Canada Value 10,188 11,128 6,384 Taiwan Value 6,957 7,382 5,910 All other exporters Value 221,917 176,009 115,042 All reporting exporters Value 623,547 572,019 467,000 Table continued. VII-16 Table VII-8 continued Chlorides: Global exports, by reporting country and by period Unit values in dollars per pound; Shares in percent Exporting country Measure 2018 2019 2020 United States Unit value 3.30 3.90 4.03 India Unit value 0.28 0.21 0.23 Germany Unit value 0.18 0.18 0.19 China Unit value 0.43 0.44 0.35 Belgium Unit value 0.45 0.29 0.20 Austria Unit value 0.32 0.07 0.07 Spain Unit value 0.25 0.20 0.18 France Unit value 0.10 0.12 0.10 Sweden Unit value 0.06 0.06 0.07 Hungary Unit value 0.04 0.04 0.05 Canada Unit value 0.29 0.25 0.14 Taiwan Unit value 0.23 0.17 0.15 All other exporters Unit value 0.76 0.66 0.55 All reporting exporters Unit value 0.38 0.31 0.27 United States Share of quantity 1.0 0.8 1.0 India Share of quantity 6.7 7.8 8.5 Germany Share of quantity 26.5 23.4 23.5 China Share of quantity 16.4 14.5 12.3 Belgium Share of quantity 10.2 9.7 10.3 Austria Share of quantity 0.3 8.0 7.9 Spain Share of quantity 4.4 4.6 6.3 France Share of quantity 4.5 4.9 6.0 Sweden Share of quantity 4.6 4.1 4.3 Hungary Share of quantity 3.6 2.8 3.3 Canada Share of quantity 2.1 2.4 2.6 Taiwan Share of quantity 1.9 2.4 2.2 All other exporters Share of quantity 17.9 14.6 11.9 All reporting exporters Share of quantity 100.0 100.0 100.0 Table continued. VII-17 Table VII-8 continued Chlorides: Global exports, by reporting country and by period Shares in percent. Exporting country Measure 2018 2019 2020 United States Share of value 8.5 9.8 14.7 India Share of value 5.0 5.4 7.2 Germany Share of value 12.4 13.4 16.7 China Share of value 18.4 20.6 16.4 Belgium Share of value 11.9 9.0 7.6 Austria Share of value 0.2 1.7 2.0 Spain Share of value 2.9 3.0 4.2 France Share of value 1.1 1.9 2.3 Sweden Share of value 0.7 0.8 1.1 Hungary Share of value 0.4 0.4 0.6 Canada Share of value 1.6 1.9 1.4 Taiwan Share of value 1.1 1.3 1.3 All other exporters Share of value 35.6 30.8 24.6 All reporting exporters Share of value 100.0 100.0 100.0 Source: Official exports statistics under Harmonized System (“HS”) 2827.39 as reported by various national statistical authorities in the Global Trade Atlas database, accessed January 22, 2022. These data may be overstated as HS subheading 2827.39 may contain products outside the scope of these investigations. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. United States is shown at the top followed by the countries under investigation, all remaining top exporting countries in descending order of 2020 data. A-1 APPENDIX A FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES A-3 The Commission makes available notices relevant to its investigations and reviews on its website, www.usitc.gov. In addition, the following tabulation presents, in chronological order, Federal Register notices issued by the Commission and Commerce during the current proceeding. Citation Title Link 87 FR 2901, January 19, 2022 Barium Chloride From India; Institution of Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations and Scheduling of Preliminary Phase Investigations https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2022-01-19/pdf/2022-00911.pdf 87 FR 7094, February 8, 2022 Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2022-02-08/pdf/2022-02559.pdf 87 FR 7100, February 8, 2022 Barium Chloride From India: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair- Value Investigation https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2022-02-08/pdf/2022-02558.pdf B-1 APPENDIX B LIST OF STAFF CONFERENCE WITNESSES B-3 CALENDAR OF PUBLIC PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE Those listed below appeared in the United States International Trade Commission’s preliminary conference via videoconference: Subject: Barium Chloride from India Inv. Nos.: 701-TA-678 and 731-TA-1584 (Preliminary) Date and Time: February 2, 2022 - 9:30 a.m. OPENING REMARKS: In Support of Imposition (Frederick P. Waite, Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP) In Opposition to Imposition (Camelia Mazard, Doyle, Barlow & Mazard PLLC) In Support of the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Order: Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP Washington, DC on behalf of Chemical Products Corporation (“CPC”) Thomas S. Bourdon, President & Chief Executive Officer. CPC Joseph L. McCall, Chief Financial Officer, CPC Janet Ingram, Chief Commercial Officer, CPC Rebecca Woodings, Consultant CPC Frederick P. Waite ) ) – OF COUNSEL Kimberly R. Young ) B-4 In Opposition to the Imposition of Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Order: Doyle, Barlow & Mazard PLLC Washington, DC on behalf of BassTech International (“BassTech”) Alan Chalup, Chief Operating Officer, BassTech Travis Pope, Project Manager, Capital Trade, Inc. Camelia C. Mazard ) – OF COUNSEL TPM Solicitors & Consultants Saket, New Delhi on behalf of Chaitanya Chemicals A K Gupta ) Divya Nair ) K. N Kothari ) ) – OF COUNSEL Rahul Malsa ) Sumit Kothari ) Ashutosh Kashyap ) REBUTTAL/CLOSING REMARKS: In Support of Imposition (Frederick P. Waite and Kimberly R. Young, Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP) In Opposition to Imposition (Camelia Mazard, Doyle, Barlow & Mazard PLLC) -END- C-1 APPENDIX C SUMMARY DATA C-2 Contents Table C-1: Barium chloride: Summary data concerning the U.S. total market, by period ........................................................................ C-3 Table C-2: Barium chloride: Summary data concerning the U.S. merchant market, by period ................................................................ C-5 Table C-1 Barium chloride: Summary data concerning the U.S. total market, by period Jan-Sep 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 U.S. total market consumption quantity: Amount.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Producers' share (fn1)............................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Importers' share (fn1): India.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Nonsubject sources............................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** All import sources........................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** U.S. total market consumption value: Amount.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Producers' share (fn1)............................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Importers' share (fn1): India.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Nonsubject sources............................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** All import sources........................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** U.S. importers' U.S. shipments of imports from: India: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Ending inventory quantity.................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** Nonsubject sources: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Ending inventory quantity.................... *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** All import sources: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Ending inventory quantity.................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** U.S. producers': Average capacity quantity....................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** *** ▼*** ▲*** Production quantity.................................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Capacity utilization (fn1).......................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** U.S. shipments: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Export shipments: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Ending inventory quantity........................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** ▲*** Inventories/total shipments (fn1)............. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Production workers.................................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** *** Hours worked (1,000s)............................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Wages paid ($1,000)............................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Hourly wages (dollars per hour).............. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** ▲*** Productivity (pounds per hour)................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▲*** Unit labor costs........................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Table continued. C-3 Quantity=1,000 pounds; Value=1,000 dollars; Unit values, unit labor costs, and unit expenses=dollars per pound; Period changes=percent--exceptions noted Reported data Period changes Calendar year Jan-Sep Comparison years Table C-1 Continued Barium chloride: Summary data concerning the U.S. total market, by period Jan-Sep 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 U.S. producers' Continued: Net sales: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Cost of goods sold (COGS).................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Gross profit or (loss) (fn2)....................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** SG&A expenses...................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Operating income or (loss) (fn2).............. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Net income or (loss) (fn2)........................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit COGS.............................................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▲*** Unit SG&A expenses.............................. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Unit operating income or (loss) (fn2)....... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Unit net income or (loss) (fn2)................. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** COGS/sales (fn1).................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▲*** Operating income or (loss)/sales (fn1).... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Net income or (loss)/sales (fn1).............. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Capital expenditures................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Research and development expenses.... *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Net assets............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** *** fn1.--Reported data are in percent and period changes are in percentage points. Note.--Shares and ratios shown as “0.0” percent represent non-zero values less than “0.05” percent (if positive) and greater than “(0.05)” percent (if negative). Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. Period changes preceded by a “▲” represent an increase, while period changes preceded by a “▼” represent a decrease. fn2.--Percent changes only calculated when both comparison values represent profits; The directional change in profitability provided when one or both comparison values represent a loss. Source: Compiled from official U.S. import statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau using HTS statistical reporting numbers 2827.39.4500, accessed on January 12, 2022, and from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Imports are based on the imports for consumption data series. Value data reflect landed duty-paid values. 508-compliant tables containing these data are contained in parts III, IV, VI, and VII of this report. C-4 Quantity=1,000 pounds; Value=1,000 dollars; Unit values, unit labor costs, and unit expenses=dollars per pound; Period changes=percent--exceptions noted Reported data Period changes Calendar year Jan-Sep Comparison years Table C-2 Barium chloride: Summary data concerning the U.S. merchant market, by period Jan-Sep 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 U.S. merchant market consumption quantity: Amount.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Producers' share (fn1)............................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Importers' share (fn1): India.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Nonsubject sources............................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** All import sources........................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** U.S. merchant market consumption value: Amount.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Producers' share (fn1)............................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Importers' share (fn1): India.................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Nonsubject sources............................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** All import sources........................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** U.S. importers' U.S. shipments of imports from: India: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Ending inventory quantity.................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** Nonsubject sources: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Ending inventory quantity.................... *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** All import sources: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Ending inventory quantity.................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** U.S. producers': Commercial U.S. shipments: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Commercial sales: Quantity............................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Value................................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Unit value............................................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Cost of goods sold (COGS).................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** ▼*** Gross profit or (loss) (fn2)....................... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** SG&A expenses...................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Operating income or (loss) (fn2).............. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Net income or (loss) (fn2)........................ *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** Unit COGS.............................................. *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▲*** Unit SG&A expenses.............................. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** Unit operating income or (loss) (fn2)....... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Unit net income or (loss) (fn2)................. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** ▲*** COGS/sales (fn1).................................... *** *** *** *** *** ▼*** ▼*** ▲*** ▲*** Operating income or (loss)/sales (fn1).... *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▼*** Net income or (loss)/sales (fn1).............. *** *** *** *** *** ▲*** ▲*** ▼*** ▲*** fn1.--Reported data are in percent and period changes are in percentage points. fn2.--Percent changes only calculated when both comparison values represent profits; The directional change in profitability provided when one or both comparison Source: Compiled from official U.S. import statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau using HTS statistical reporting numbers 2827.39.4500, accessed on January 12, 2022, and from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Imports are based on the imports for consumption data series. Value data reflect landed duty-paid values. 508-compliant tables containing these data are contained in parts III, IV, VI, and VII of this report. C-5 Reported data Period changes Calendar year Jan-Sep Comparison years Note.--Shares and ratios shown as “0.0” percent represent non-zero values less than “0.05” percent (if positive) and greater than “(0.05)” percent (if negative). Quantity=1,000 pounds; Value=1,000 dollars; Unit values, unit labor costs, and unit expenses=dollars per pound; Period changes=percent--exceptions noted D-1 APPENDIX D OFFICIAL U.S. IMPORT STATISTICS FOR BARIUM CHLORIDE D-3 Table D-1 Barium chloride: U.S. imports, by source and by month Quantity in 1,000 pounds Year Month India Nonsubject sources All import sources 2018 January 555 2 558 2018 February 547 --- 547 2018 March 857 --- 857 2018 April 418 0 419 2018 May 638 --- 638 2018 June 162 --- 162 2018 July 843 --- 843 2018 August 853 --- 853 2018 September 178 --- 178 2018 October 95 --- 95 2018 November 132 --- 132 2018 December 314 0 314 2019 January 401 9 410 2019 February 53 1 54 2019 March 91 2 93 2019 April 196 --- 196 2019 May 132 --- 132 2019 June 224 --- 224 2019 July 448 --- 448 2019 August 44 --- 44 2019 September 225 --- 225 2019 October 720 3 723 2019 November 721 --- 721 2019 December 573 --- 573 Table continued. D-4 Table D-1 continued Barium chloride: U.S. imports, by source and by month Quantity in 1,000 pounds Year Month India Nonsubject sources All import sources 2020 January 449 --- 449 2020 February 473 --- 473 2020 March 1,106 --- 1,106 2020 April 398 --- 398 2020 May 450 --- 450 2020 June 311 --- 311 2020 July 607 3 609 2020 August 112 --- 112 2020 September 178 --- 178 2020 October 2 --- 2 2020 November 13 3 16 2020 December --- --- --- 2021 January 89 --- 89 2021 February 1 --- 1 2021 March 88 --- 88 2021 April 173 0 173 2021 May 450 3 453 2021 June 540 --- 540 2021 July 405 --- 405 2021 August 495 --- 495 2021 September 179 --- 179 2021 October 270 --- 270 2021 November 405 --- 405 Source: Compiled from official U.S. imports statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce using HTS statistical reporting numbers 2827.39.4500, accessed January 12, 2022. Imports are based on the imports for consumption data series. Note: Data shown as “0” represent non-zero values less than 500 pounds; zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---“. D-5 Figure D-1 Barium chloride: U.S. import quantities, by source and period Source: Compiled from official U.S. import statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce Census Bureau using HTS statistical reporting numbers 2827.39.4500, accessed on January 12, 2022. Imports are based on the imports for consumption data series. 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 Calendar year Jan-Sep Quantity (1,000 pounds) Subject quantities (left-axis) Nonsubject quantities (left-axis) E-1 APPENDIX E DATA TABLES ACCOMPANYING FIGURES IN PART II E-3 Appendix E-1 Crude oil and gasoline prices: Cushing, OK crude oil future contract 1-4 (average) price, and U.S. regular all formulations retail gasoline prices, by month Crude oil future contract price in dollars per barrel, retail gasoline price in dollars per gallon Year Month Crude oil future contract price Retail gasoline price 2018 January 63.32 2.55 2018 February 61.74 2.59 2018 March 62.59 2.59 2018 April 66.02 2.76 2018 May 69.58 2.90 2018 June 66.54 2.89 2018 July 68.76 2.85 2018 August 67.08 2.84 2018 September 69.74 2.84 2018 October 70.73 2.86 2018 November 56.86 2.65 2018 December 49.12 2.37 2019 January 52.05 2.25 2019 February 55.63 2.31 2019 March 58.63 2.52 2019 April 63.90 2.80 2019 May 60.98 2.86 2019 June 54.85 2.72 2019 July 57.60 2.74 2019 August 54.56 2.62 2019 September 56.60 2.59 2019 October 53.94 2.63 2019 November 56.97 2.60 2019 December 59.47 2.56 2020 January 57.39 2.55 2020 February 50.82 2.44 2020 March 32.17 2.23 2020 April 24.36 1.84 2020 May 29.81 1.87 2020 June 38.62 2.08 2020 July 41.03 2.18 2020 August 42.83 2.18 2020 September 40.12 2.18 2020 October 40.03 2.16 2020 November 41.54 2.11 2020 December 47.26 2.20 Table continued. E-4 Appendix E-1--continued Crude oil and gasoline prices: Cushing, OK crude oil future contract 1-4 (average) price, and U.S. regular all formulations retail gasoline prices, by month Crude oil future contract price in dollars per barrel, retail gasoline price in dollars per gallon Year Month Crude oil future contract price Retail gasoline price 2021 January 52.01 2.33 2021 February 58.70 2.50 2021 March 62.09 2.81 2021 April 61.54 2.86 2021 May 64.85 2.99 2021 June 70.53 3.06 2021 July 71.33 3.14 2021 August 67.19 3.16 2021 September 71.01 3.18 2021 October 79.93 3.29 2021 November 77.67 3.39 2021 December 71.25 3.31 2022 January 81.72 3.31 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/weekly/, retrieved February 5, 2022. E-5 Appendix E-2 Industrial drilling production and price indexes, by month January 2018 = 100; changes in percent Year Month Industrial drilling production index Oil and gas drilling wells PPI 2018 January 100.0 100.0 2018 February 104.7 100.4 2018 March 107.0 100.2 2018 April 111.7 100.4 2018 May 118.1 101.5 2018 June 120.1 102.0 2018 July 119.5 101.4 2018 August 120.1 101.3 2018 September 120.3 100.4 2018 October 121.3 102.0 2018 November 122.6 104.1 2018 December 122.3 104.2 2019 January 119.2 104.1 2019 February 116.9 103.7 2019 March 114.6 103.7 2019 April 113.8 103.6 2019 May 111.5 103.6 2019 June 111.9 103.7 2019 July 112.3 102.9 2019 August 112.1 102.1 2019 September 109.6 102.0 2019 October 107.8 101.7 2019 November 106.9 101.2 2019 December 110.2 101.1 2020 January 111.9 100.5 2020 February 116.3 99.5 2020 March 116.1 98.2 2020 April 86.7 96.4 2020 May 57.1 94.7 2020 June 47.4 94.7 2020 July 45.3 94.1 2020 August 45.4 94.2 2020 September 47.7 93.8 2020 October 51.2 94.5 2020 November 55.4 94.4 2020 December 61.3 94.2 Table continued. E-6 Appendix E-2--continued Industrial drilling production and price indexes, by month January 2018 = 100; changes in percent Year Month Industrial drilling production index Oil and gas drilling wells PPI 2021 January 66.6 93.0 2021 February 70.3 94.6 2021 March 70.4 94.6 2021 April 73.3 95.4 2021 May 76.2 95.4 2021 June 77.5 97.4 2021 July 81.2 97.9 2021 August 82.4 98.8 2021 September 80.9 99.2 2021 October 87.6 99.6 2021 November 91.8 99.8 2021 December 94.8 99.9 Source: St. Louis Federal Reserve Economic Data, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IPN213111N# and https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCU213111213111P, retrieved February 10, 2022. Note: Mining, quarrying and oil and gas extraction industrial drilling data are not seasonally adjusted and based on NAICS code 213111. Producer price index for oil and gas drilling wells are for primary services and not seasonally adjusted. E-7 Appendix E-3 Construction spending: Total construction spending in the United States, seasonally adjusted annual rate, by month Construction spending in trillions of dollars Year Month Construction spending 2018 January 1.34 2018 February 1.36 2018 March 1.35 2018 April 1.36 2018 May 1.37 2018 June 1.35 2018 July 1.34 2018 August 1.33 2018 September 1.32 2018 October 1.30 2018 November 1.29 2018 December 1.28 2019 January 1.30 2019 February 1.32 2019 March 1.34 2019 April 1.36 2019 May 1.37 2019 June 1.39 2019 July 1.41 2019 August 1.42 2019 September 1.43 2019 October 1.43 2019 November 1.45 2019 December 1.46 2020 January 1.49 2020 February 1.50 2020 March 1.51 2020 April 1.45 2020 May 1.44 2020 June 1.44 2020 July 1.44 2020 August 1.46 2020 September 1.46 2020 October 1.47 2020 November 1.49 2020 December 1.50 Table continued. E-8 Appendix E-3--continued Construction spending: Total construction spending in the United States, seasonally adjusted annual rate, by month Construction spending in trillions of dollars Year Month Construction spending 2021 January 1.55 2021 February 1.53 2021 March 1.55 2021 April 1.55 2021 May 1.56 2021 June 1.58 2021 July 1.58 2021 August 1.60 2021 September 1.61 2021 October 1.62 2021 November 1.63 Source: St. Louis Federal Reserve Economic Data, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TTLCONS, retrieved February 9, 2022. F-1 APPENDIX F DATA TABLES ACCOMPANYING FIGURES IN PART V F-3 Appendix F-1a Baryte imports: Average unit values of imports of ground barium natural barium sulfate (barytes) from China, Mexico, Morocco, and Vietnam, by source and by month Unit values in dollars per pound Year Month China Mexico Morocco Vietnam 2018 January 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 February 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 March 0.05 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 April 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 May 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 June 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 July 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 August 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 September 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 October 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2018 November 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 2018 December 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2019 January 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 2019 February 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.04 2019 March 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 2019 April 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.07 2019 May 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 2019 June 0.03 0.06 0.04 0.06 2019 July 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.05 2019 August 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 2019 September 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2019 October 0.05 0.06 0.04 --- 2019 November 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2019 December 0.05 0.06 0.04 --- 2020 January 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2020 February 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2020 March 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2020 April 0.04 0.06 0.05 --- 2020 May 0.03 0.05 0.05 --- 2020 June 0.04 0.06 0.05 --- 2020 July 0.04 0.05 0.05 --- 2020 August 0.04 0.05 0.05 --- 2020 September 0.04 0.05 0.04 --- 2020 October 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2020 November 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2020 December 0.04 0.05 0.04 --- Table continued. F-4 Appendix F1a--continued Baryte imports: Average unit values of imports of ground barium natural barium sulfate (barytes) from China, Mexico, Morocco, and Vietnam, monthly, January 2018–December 2021 Unit values in dollars per pound Year Month China Mexico Morocco Vietnam 2021 January 0.05 0.04 0.04 --- 2021 February 0.05 0.05 0.04 --- 2021 March 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2021 April 0.04 0.06 0.04 --- 2021 May 0.04 0.04 0.04 --- 2021 June 0.04 0.05 0.04 --- 2021 July 0.05 0.05 0.03 --- 2021 August 0.05 0.05 0.03 --- 2021 September 0.04 0.06 0.03 --- 2021 October 0.04 0.05 0.03 --- 2021 November 0.05 0.06 0.04 --- 2021 December 0.05 0.06 0.03 --- Source: USITC Dataweb, HTS statistical reporting number 2511.10.1000, accessed February 10, 2022. F-5 Appendix F-1b Baryte imports: Quantities of imports of ground barium natural barium sulfate (barytes) from China, Mexico, Morocco, and Vietnam, by source and by month Quantity in thousands of pounds Year Month China Mexico Morocco Vietnam 2018 January 187,276 37,518 23,034 --- 2018 February 222,781 38,951 44,172 --- 2018 March 167,179 33,656 35,089 --- 2018 April 194,681 36,041 32,236 --- 2018 May 167,088 34,904 38,451 --- 2018 June 168,629 39,818 31,447 --- 2018 July 155,529 45,424 27,240 --- 2018 August 146,956 48,356 46,218 --- 2018 September 98,908 36,204 22,562 --- 2018 October 161,533 34,194 57,519 --- 2018 November 124,453 38,636 47,569 5,335 2018 December 98,599 43,409 54,653 --- 2019 January 78,524 40,962 79,421 18,283 2019 February 68,061 38,543 64,699 13,653 2019 March 153,228 41,643 61,108 8,289 2019 April 121,651 42,044 72,131 6,061 2019 May 139,400 28,393 59,097 6,742 2019 June 100,670 30,144 39,604 7,288 2019 July 121,900 36,134 36,237 5,617 2019 August 123,256 37,465 32,326 1,967 2019 September 72,686 43,480 59,606 --- 2019 October 127,883 36,372 44,846 --- 2019 November 77,949 36,378 31,967 --- 2019 December 88,888 42,851 38,301 --- 2020 January 143,730 50,642 47,675 --- 2020 February 78,354 47,119 48,841 --- 2020 March 116,662 48,638 54,242 --- 2020 April 85,945 44,882 25,622 --- 2020 May 38,942 32,209 17,319 --- 2020 June 57,631 29,152 9,478 --- 2020 July 45,479 22,955 15,789 --- 2020 August 58,142 17,780 5,445 --- 2020 September 97,252 15,139 2,820 --- 2020 October 76,174 17,604 3,433 --- 2020 November 114,045 14,667 2,822 --- 2020 December 117,561 25,100 8,770 --- Table continued. F-6 Appendix F-1b--continued Baryte imports: Quantities of imports of ground barium natural barium sulfate (barytes) from China, Mexico, Morocco, and Vietnam, by source and by month Quantity in thousands of pounds Year Month China Mexico Morocco Vietnam 2021 January 51,030 41,879 9,001 --- 2021 February 66,965 17,322 15,064 --- 2021 March 65,552 25,236 47,144 --- 2021 April 52,620 27,745 14,839 --- 2021 May 72,367 47,624 13,770 --- 2021 June 55,938 42,487 40,327 --- 2021 July 62,139 27,335 99,607 --- 2021 August 103,886 29,754 89,856 --- 2021 September 78,925 30,479 73,738 --- 2021 October 51,756 36,636 63,301 --- 2021 November 44,926 41,961 72,863 --- 2021 December 60,440 37,174 45,043 --- Source: USITC Dataweb, HTS statistical reporting number 2511.10.1000, accessed February 10, 2022. F-7 Appendix F-2 Producer Price Index for petroleum coke and other petroleum and coal products, not seasonally adjusted, by month January 2018 = 100; changes in percent Year Month Pet coke and other products PPI 2018 January 100.0 2018 February 102.2 2018 March 103.3 2018 April 108.2 2018 May 109.9 2018 June 109.1 2018 July 114.5 2018 August 115.1 2018 September 112.0 2018 October 115.3 2018 November 117.0 2018 December 110.9 2019 January 104.6 2019 February 106.2 2019 March 106.3 2019 April 109.3 2019 May 105.1 2019 June 103.8 2019 July 98.8 2019 August 96.7 2019 September 90.9 2019 October 76.9 2019 November 82.5 2019 December 85.9 2020 January 76.7 2020 February 76.9 2020 March 79.5 2020 April 87.0 2020 May 86.8 2020 June 83.7 2020 July 84.2 2020 August 84.8 2020 September 84.9 2020 October 92.3 2020 November 100.1 2020 December 113.1 Table continued. F-8 Appendix F-2--continued Producer Price Index for petroleum coke and other petroleum and coal products, not seasonally adjusted, by month January 2018 = 100; changes in percent Year Month Pet coke and other products PPI 2021 January 116.3 2021 February 114.1 2021 March 115.8 2021 April 119.9 2021 May 127.1 2021 June 128.6 2021 July 124.6 2021 August 108.7 2021 September 114.6 2021 October 118.4 2021 November 132.1 2021 December 156.6 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU058103, retrieved February 10, 2022. F-9 Appendix F-3 Producer Price Index for inorganic acids, including hydrochloric acid, not seasonally adjusted, by month January 2018 = 100; changes in percent Year Month Inorganic acids including hydrochloric acid PPI 2018 January 100.0 2018 February 102.6 2018 March 110.4 2018 April 110.1 2018 May 110.2 2018 June 110.6 2018 July 113.8 2018 August 111.3 2018 September 112.1 2018 October 113.5 2018 November 114.3 2018 December 116.3 2019 January 116.9 2019 February 118.1 2019 March 116.1 2019 April 117.1 2019 May 115.1 2019 June 114.0 2019 July 112.3 2019 August 110.4 2019 September 110.7 2019 October 110.3 2019 November 107.6 2019 December 100.2 2020 January 96.7 2020 February 96.4 2020 March 86.9 2020 April 81.5 2020 May 79.9 2020 June 83.0 2020 July 82.6 2020 August 80.4 2020 September 80.0 2020 October 80.3 2020 November 80.5 2020 December 81.4 Table continued. F-10 Appendix F-3--continued Producer Price Index for inorganic acids, including hydrochloric acid, not seasonally adjusted, by month January 2018 = 100; changes in percent Year Month Inorganic acids including hydrochloric acid PPI 2021 January 81.5 2021 February 83.9 2021 March 85.2 2021 April 87.2 2021 May 103.8 2021 June 106.8 2021 July 112.3 2021 August 111.2 2021 September 110.7 2021 October 112.5 2021 November 113.1 2021 December 113.1 Source: FRED, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU0613020T#0, retrieved February 7, 2022. F-11 Appendix F-4 Average retail industrial price of electricity in the United States, by month Price in cents per kilowatt hour Year Month Electricity price 2018 January 6.94 2018 February 6.78 2018 March 6.63 2018 April 6.57 2018 May 6.79 2018 June 7.17 2018 July 7.32 2018 August 7.25 2018 September 7.05 2018 October 6.87 2018 November 6.85 2018 December 6.67 2019 January 6.58 2019 February 6.69 2019 March 6.73 2019 April 6.51 2019 May 6.69 2019 June 6.87 2019 July 7.14 2019 August 7.40 2019 September 7.06 2019 October 6.84 2019 November 6.72 2019 December 6.38 2020 January 6.37 2020 February 6.44 2020 March 6.39 2020 April 6.39 2020 May 6.54 2020 June 6.94 2020 July 7.16 2020 August 7.07 2020 September 7.00 2020 October 6.72 2020 November 6.49 2020 December 6.41 Table continued. F-12 Appendix F-4--continued Average retail industrial price of electricity in the United States, by month Price in cents per kilowatt hour Year Month Electricity price 2021 January 6.39 2021 February 7.90 2021 March 7.05 2021 April 6.76 2021 May 6.71 2021 June 7.28 2021 July 7.54 2021 August 7.65 2021 September 7.71 2021 October 7.53 2021 November 7.47 Source: Energy Information Administration, https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/7?agg=2, retrieved February 7, 2022. G-1 APPENDIX G FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR MERCHANT MARKET OPERATIONS G-3 Table G-1 Barium chloride: Results of merchant market operations of U.S. producer CPC, by item and period Quantity in 1,000 pounds; value in 1,000 dollars; ratios in percent; shares in percent Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Commercial net sales Quantity *** *** *** *** *** Commercial net sales Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Value *** *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) Value *** *** *** *** *** SG&A expenses Value *** *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) Value *** *** *** *** *** Interest expense Value *** *** *** *** *** All other expenses Value *** *** *** *** *** All other income Value *** *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) Value *** *** *** *** *** Depreciation/amortization Value *** *** *** *** *** Estimated cash flow from operations Value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** SG&A expenses Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) Ratio to NS *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials Share *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Share *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Share *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Share *** *** *** *** *** Table continued. G-4 Table G-1 continued Barium chloride: Results of merchant market operations of U.S. producer CPC, by item and period Unit values in dollars per pound; count in number of firms reporting Item Measure 2018 2019 2020 Jan-Sep 2020 Jan-Sep 2021 Commercial net sales Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory Unit value *** *** *** *** *** COGS: Total Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) Unit value *** *** *** *** *** SG&A expenses Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) Unit value *** *** *** *** *** Operating losses Count *** *** *** *** *** Net losses Count *** *** *** *** *** Data Count *** *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Ratios represent the ratio to net sales value and shares represent the share of COGS. Table G-2 Barium chloride: Changes in U.S. producer CPC’s merchant market AUVs between comparison periods Changes in percent Item 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 Jan-Sep 2020-21 Commercial net sales *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory *** *** *** *** COGS: Total *** *** *** *** Table continued. G-5 Table G-2 continued Barium chloride: Changes in U.S. producer CPC’s merchant market AUVs between comparison periods Changes in dollars per pound Item 2018-20 2018-19 2019-20 Jan-Sep 2020-21 Commercial net sales *** *** *** *** COGS: Raw materials *** *** *** *** COGS: Direct labor *** *** *** *** COGS: Other factory *** *** *** *** COGS: Total *** *** *** *** Gross profit or (loss) *** *** *** *** SG&A expense *** *** *** *** Operating income or (loss) *** *** *** *** Net income or (loss) *** *** *** *** Source: Compiled from data submitted in response to Commission questionnaires. Note: Shares and ratios shown as "0.0" represent values greater than zero, but less than "0.05" percent. Zeroes, null values, and undefined calculations are suppressed and shown as “---”. Period changes preceded by a “▲” represent an increase, while period changes preceded by a “▼” represent a decrease.