Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 64468-64471 [2012-25970]
Download as PDF
64468
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 204 / Monday, October 22, 2012 / Notices
pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. If
the ITC determines that material injury,
or threat of material injury, does not
exist, this proceeding will be terminated
and all estimated deposits or securities
posted as a result of the suspension of
liquidation will be refunded or
canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of
the Act, we will notify the ITC of our
determination. In addition, we are
making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary
information related to this investigation.
We will allow the ITC access to all
privileged and business proprietary
information in our files, provided the
ITC confirms that it will not disclose
such information, either publicly or
under an administrative protective order
(‘‘APO’’), without the written consent of
the Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary
Information
Dated: October 15, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–25966 Filed 10–19–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
International Trade Administration
A. Tariff Exemptions on Imported
Equipment, Machinery, Materials, and
Packaging Materials Under the Federal Law
of 1979 and/or GCC Industrial Law
Comment 1 De Jure Specificity of Tariff
Exemptions
Comment 2 Tariff Exemptions as Export
Subsidies
Comment 3 Application of AFA Due To the
GUAE’s Failure to Provide Industry Usage
Data
Comment 4 Countervailability of Alita’s
Tariff Exemptions
Jkt 229001
Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel
Pipe From India: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the ‘‘Department’’) has determined that
countervailable subsidies are being
provided to producers and exporters of
circular welded carbon-quality steel
pipe (‘‘circular welded pipe’’) from
India. For information on the estimated
countervailing duty rates, see the
‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section,
below.
AGENCY:
Effective Date: October 22, 2012.
Shane Subler, Thomas Schauer, or
David Layton, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 1, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–0189, (202) 482–0410, and (202)
482–0371, respectively.
Petitioners
The petitioners in this investigation
are Allied Tube and Conduit, JMC Steel
Group, United States Steel Corporation,
and Wheatland Tube Corporation
(‘‘Wheatland’’) (collectively,
‘‘Petitioners’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Period of Investigation
The period for which we are
measuring subsidies, or period of
investigation, is April 1, 2010, through
March 31, 2011.
Case History
The following events have occurred
since the publication of the preliminary
determination.1
We received a case brief from the
Government of India (‘‘GOI’’) on May
21, 2012. Wheatland submitted a
rebuttal brief on May 29, 2012.
Zenith Birla (India) Ltd. (‘‘Zenith’’)
submitted a case brief on May 23, 2012.
We rejected Zenith’s case brief and
removed it from the record because it
contained new factual information. We
requested that Zenith re-submit its case
brief without the new factual
information.2 Zenith did not re-submit
its case brief. Accordingly, we did not
consider the arguments Zenith made in
the case brief we rejected and removed
from the record of this investigation.
The GOI and Wheatland each
requested a hearing on April 30, 2012.
We held the hearing on August 6, 2012.
Scope of the Investigation
[C–533–853]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
List of Comments and Issues in the Decision
Memorandum
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
D. Other Programs
Comment 10 Non-Existence of Alleged
Programs Under the Federal Law of 1979
and/or the GCC Industrial Law
DATES:
Appendix
15:00 Oct 19, 2012
C. The GUAE’s Provision of Natural Gas for
LTAR
Comment 8 Scope of the Investigation of
the GUAE’s Provision of Natural Gas for
LTAR
Comment 9 Whether the Department
Should Delay its Finding or Apply AFA
Due to Non-Cooperation for the Provision
of Natural Gas for LTAR
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
In the event that the ITC issues a final
negative injury determination, this
notice will serve as the only reminder
to parties subject to an APO of their
responsibility concerning the
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return/
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation which is subject to
sanction.
This determination is published
pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of
the Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
B. Subsidies Within the Jebel Ali Free Zone
Comment 5 Scope of the Tariff Exemptions
Program: UAE Customs Territory and the
JAFZ
Comment 6 Regional Specificity of Tariff
Exemptions in the JAFZ
Comment 7 Application of Facts Available
to Universal Plastic Due to NonCooperation Regarding Subsidies in the
JAFZ
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
This investigation covers welded
carbon-quality steel pipes and tube, of
circular cross-section, with an outside
diameter (‘‘O.D.’’) not more than 16
inches (406.4 mm), regardless of wall
thickness, surface finish (e.g., black,
galvanized, or painted), end finish
(plain end, beveled end, grooved,
threaded, or threaded and coupled), or
industry specification (e.g., American
Society for Testing and Materials
International (‘‘ASTM’’), proprietary, or
other) generally known as standard
pipe, fence pipe and tube, sprinkler
pipe, and structural pipe (although
subject product may also be referred to
as mechanical tubing). Specifically, the
term ‘‘carbon quality’’ includes products
in which: (a) Iron predominates, by
weight, over each of the other contained
elements; (b) the carbon content is 2
percent or less, by weight; and (c) none
of the elements listed below exceeds the
quantity, by weight, as indicated:
(i) 1.80 percent of manganese;
(ii) 2.25 percent of silicon;
(iii) 1.00 percent of copper;
(iv) 0.50 percent of aluminum;
(v) 1.25 percent of chromium;
1 See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe
From India: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination and Alignment of Final
Countervailing Duty Determination With Final
Antidumping Duty Determination, 77 FR 19192
(March 30, 2012) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
2 See letter from Susan Kuhbach to Zenith dated
May 24, 2012, and Memorandum from David
Layton to File dated May 24, 2012.
E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM
22OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 204 / Monday, October 22, 2012 / Notices
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
(vi) 0.30 percent of cobalt;
(vii) 0.40 percent of lead;
(viii) 1.25 percent of nickel;
(ix) 0.30 percent of tungsten;
(x) 0.15 percent of molybdenum;
(xi) 0.10 percent of niobium;
(xii) 0.41 percent of titanium;
(xiii) 0.15 percent of vanadium;
(xiv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
Subject pipe is ordinarily made to
ASTM specifications A53, A135, and
A795, but can also be made to other
specifications. Structural pipe is made
primarily to ASTM specifications A252
and A500. Standard and structural pipe
may also be produced to proprietary
specifications rather than to industry
specifications. Fence tubing is included
in the scope regardless of certification to
a specification listed in the exclusions
below, and can also be made to the
ASTM A513 specification. Sprinkler
pipe is designed for sprinkler fire
suppression systems and may be made
to industry specifications such as ASTM
A53 or to proprietary specifications.
These products are generally made to
standard O.D. and wall thickness
combinations. Pipe multi-stenciled to a
standard and/or structural specification
and to other specifications, such as
American Petroleum Institute (‘‘API’’)
API–5L specification, is also covered by
the scope of this investigation when it
meets the physical description set forth
above, and also has one or more of the
following characteristics: Is 32 feet in
length or less; is less than 2.0 inches
(50mm) in outside diameter; has a
galvanized and/or painted (e.g.,
polyester coated) surface finish; or has
a threaded and/or coupled end finish.
The scope of this investigation does
not include: (a) Pipe suitable for use in
boilers, superheaters, heat exchangers,
refining furnaces and feedwater heaters,
whether or not cold drawn; (b) finished
electrical conduit; (c) finished
scaffolding; 3 (d) tube and pipe hollows
for redrawing; (e) oil country tubular
goods produced to API specifications; (f)
line pipe produced to only API
specifications; and (g) mechanical
tubing, whether or not cold-drawn.
However, products certified to ASTM
mechanical tubing specifications are not
excluded as mechanical tubing if they
otherwise meet the standard sizes (e.g.,
outside diameter and wall thickness) of
standard, structural, fence and sprinkler
pipe. Also, products made to the
following outside diameter and wall
3 Finished scaffolding is defined as component
parts of a final, finished scaffolding that enters the
United States unassembled as a ‘‘kit.’’ A ‘‘kit’’ is
understood to mean a packaged combination of
component parts that contain, at the time of
importation, all the necessary component parts to
fully assemble a final, finished scaffolding.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Oct 19, 2012
Jkt 229001
thickness combinations, which are
recognized by the industry as typical for
fence tubing, would not be excluded
from the scope based solely on their
being certified to ASTM mechanical
tubing specifications:
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.035 inch wall
thickness (gage 20)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall
thickness (gage 18)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall
thickness (gage 17)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall
thickness (gage 16)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall
thickness (gage 15)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.083 inch wall
thickness (gage 14)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall
thickness (gage 13)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall
thickness (gage 18)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall
thickness (gage 17)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall
thickness (gage 16)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall
thickness (gage 15)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.083 inch wall
thickness (gage 14)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall
thickness (gage 13)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall
thickness (gage 12)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall
thickness (gage 18)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall
thickness (gage 17)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall
thickness (gage 16)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall
thickness (gage 15)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall
thickness (gage 13)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall
thickness (gage 12)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall
thickness (gage 18)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall
thickness (gage 17)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall
thickness (gage 16)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall
thickness (gage 15)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall
thickness (gage 13)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall
thickness (gage 12)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.120 inch wall
thickness (gage 11)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall
thickness (gage 12)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.134 inch wall
thickness (gage 10)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall
thickness (gage 8)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall
thickness (gage 12)
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64469
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.148 inch wall
thickness (gage 9)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall
thickness (gage 8)
4.000 inch O.D. and 0.148 inch wall
thickness (gage 9)
4.000 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall
thickness (gage 8)
4.500 inch O.D. and 0.203 inch wall
thickness (gage 7)
The pipe subject to this investigation
is currently classifiable in Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) statistical reporting numbers
7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050,
7306.19.5110, 7306.19.5150,
7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025,
7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040,
7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085,
7306.30.5090, 7306.50.1000,
7306.50.5050, and 7306.50.5070.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
merchandise under the investigation is
dispositive.
Scope Comments
In accordance with the preamble to
the Department’s regulations, we set
aside a period of time in our initiation
notice for parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage, and
encouraged all parties to submit
comments within 20 calendar days of
publication of that notice.4 As described
in the Preliminary Determination, SeAH
Steel VINA Corp. (‘‘SeAH VINA’’) filed
comments on December 5, 2011, urging
the Department to modify the scope
description. No further comments on
this issue were received. For the reasons
explained in the Preliminary
Determination, the Department is not
adopting SeAH VINA’s proposed
modification of the scope.
Injury Test
Because India is a ‘‘Subsidies
Agreement Country’’ within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’),
section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to
this investigation. Accordingly, the U.S.
International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’)
must determine whether imports of the
subject merchandise from India
materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, a U.S. industry. On December
16, 2011, the ITC published its
affirmative preliminary determination
that there is a reasonable indication that
4 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997), and Circular
Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India, the
Sultanate of Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of
Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 72173
(November 22, 2011).
E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM
22OCN1
64470
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 204 / Monday, October 22, 2012 / Notices
an industry in the United States is
materially injured by reason of allegedly
subsidized imports of circular welded
pipe from India.5
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this
investigation are addressed in the
Memorandum from Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration,
entitled ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final
Determination in the Countervailing
Duty Investigation of Circular Welded
Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from India’’
(October 15, 2012) (hereafter ‘‘Decision
Memorandum’’), which is hereby
adopted by this notice. Attached to this
notice as an Appendix is a list of the
issues that parties have raised and to
which we have responded in the
Decision Memorandum. This Decision
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Import
Administration’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (‘‘IA
ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central
Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), room 7046 of the
main Department of Commerce
building. In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memorandum
can be accessed directly on the Internet
at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed
Decision Memorandum and the
electronic versions of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
Use of Adverse Facts Available
For purposes of this final
determination, we have continued to
rely on facts available and to draw an
adverse inference, in accordance with
sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, to
determine the subsidy rates for the
mandatory respondents. For a full
discussion of these issues, see the
Decision Memorandum, at ‘‘Use of Facts
Otherwise Available and Adverse Facts
Available.’’
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section
705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we have
calculated individual rates for each
producer/exporter of the subject
merchandise individually investigated.
5 See
Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe
From India, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and
Vietnam; Determinations, 76 FR 78313 (December
16, 2011) and Investigation Nos. 701–TA–482–485
and 731–TA–1191–1194 (Preliminary) (December
12, 2011).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Oct 19, 2012
Jkt 229001
With respect to the all-others rate,
section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act
provides that if the countervailable
subsidy rates established for all
exporters and producers individually
investigated are determined entirely in
accordance with section 776 of the Act,
the Department may use any reasonable
method to establish an all-others rate for
exporters and producers not
individually investigated. The Court of
International Trade recently concluded
that the statute permits the Department
to use mandatory respondents’ AFA
rates in the calculation of the all-others
rate.6 The Court found this methodology
reasonable. In this case, the rate
calculated for both of the investigated
companies is based entirely on facts
available under section 776 of the Act.
There is no other information on the
record upon which to determine an allothers rate. As a result, we have used
the adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) rate
assigned for Lloyds Metals and
Engineers Ltd. and Zenith as the allothers rate. This method is consistent
with the Department’s past practice.7
We determine the total
countervailable subsidy rates to be as
follows.
Exporter/manufacturer
Lloyds Metals and Engineers
Ltd. ....................................
Zenith Birla (India) Ltd. .........
All Others ..............................
Net subsidy
rate
285.95
285.95
285.95
As a result of our Preliminary
Determination, we instructed U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
to suspend liquidation of all entries of
circular welded pipe from India which
were entered or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption on or after
March 30, 2012, the date of the
publication of the Preliminary
Determination in the Federal Register,
and to collect cash deposits or bonds in
the amount of the preliminary
countervailing duty rates. In accordance
with section 703(d) of the Act, we later
issued instructions to CBP to
discontinue the suspension of
liquidation for countervailing duty
purposes for subject merchandise
entered or withdrawn from warehouse
on or after July 28, 2012, but to continue
the suspension of liquidation of all
6 See MacLean-Fogg Co. v United States, 836 F.
Supp. 2d 1267, 1374–1375 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2012).
7 See, e.g., Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat
Products From Argentina, 66 FR 37007, 37008 (July
16, 2001); see also Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination: Prestressed Concrete Steel
Wire Strand From India, 68 FR 68356 (December 8,
2003).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
entries from March 30, 2012 through
July 27, 2012.
We will issue a countervailing duty
order and reinstate the suspension of
liquidation under section 706(a) of the
Act if the U.S. International Trade
Commission (‘‘ITC’’) issues a final
affirmative injury determination, and
will require a cash deposit of estimated
countervailing duties for such entries in
the amounts indicated above. If the ITC
determines that material injury, or
threat of material injury, does not exist,
this proceeding will be terminated and
all estimated deposits or securities
posted as a result of the suspension of
liquidation will be refunded or
canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of
the Act, we will notify the ITC of our
determination. In addition, we are
making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary
information related to this investigation.
We will allow the ITC access to all
privileged and business proprietary
information in our files, provided the
ITC confirms that it will not disclose
such information, either publicly or
under an APO, without the written
consent of the Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary
Information
In the event that the ITC issues a final
negative injury determination, this
notice will serve as the only reminder
to parties subject to an administrative
protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return/
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation which is subject to
sanction.
This determination is published
pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: October 15, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix
List of Comments and Issues in the Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1 Whether the GOI Cooperated to
the Best of Its Ability and Should Not Be
Subject to the AFA Rate that the
Department Preliminarily Applied
E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM
22OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 204 / Monday, October 22, 2012 / Notices
Comment 2 Whether the Application of the
AFA Standard Is Inconsistent with Article
12.7 of ASCM
Comment 3 Whether the Department’s
Application of AFA With Respect to
Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel by SAIL For
LTAR Was Justified
Comment 4 Whether the Department’s
Application of AFA With Respect to
Provision of Land For LTAR Was Justified
Comment 5 Whether the Department Erred
in Calculating the Subsidy Rate It Assigned
in the Preliminary Determination
[FR Doc. 2012–25970 Filed 10–19–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–552–810]
Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel
Pipe From the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Final Negative Countervailing
Duty Determination
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘the Department’’) determines that
countervailable subsidies are not being
provided to producers and exporters of
circular welded carbon-quality steel
pipe (‘‘circular welded pipe’’) from the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam
(‘‘Vietnam’’).
AGENCY:
DATES:
Effective Date: October 22, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Siepmann or Austin
Redington, AD/CVD Operations, Office
1, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–7958 or
(202) 482–1664, respectively.
Petitioners
The petitioners in this investigation
are Allied Tube and Conduit, JMC Steel
Group, United States Steel Corporation,
and Wheatland Tube.
Period of Investigation
The period for which we are
measuring subsidies, or period of
investigation, is January 1, 2010,
through December 31, 2010.
On April 13, 2012, the Department
issued supplemental questionnaires to
the Government of Vietnam (‘‘GOV’’),
SeAH Steel VINA Corp. (‘‘SeAH
VINA’’), and Vietnam Haiphong
Hongyuan Machinery Manufactory Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Hongyuan’’). Timely responses
were received on April 20 (Hongyuan),
April 27 (Hongyuan), and April 27, and
May 7, 2012 (GOV). On May 4, 2012, the
Department issued an additional
supplemental questionnaire to the GOV,
and it received the GOV’s response on
May 7, 2012.
We received factual information
submissions from the GOV and
Wheatland Tube, respectively, on May 9
and May 14, 2012. On May 10, 2012,
Hongyuan filed corrections to its
previously reported data and also
submitted additional factual
information. On May 14, 2012, SeAH
VINA submitted corrections to its
previously reported data.
The Department conducted
verification of SeAH VINA’s,
Hongyuan’s, and the GOV’s
questionnaire responses from May 21, to
June 1, 2012, and issued verification
reports for SeAH VINA and Hongyuan
on July 6, 2012, and for the GOV on July
12, 2012.
The GOV, SeAH VINA, Hongyuan,
and Wheatland Tube submitted case
briefs on August 3, and rebuttal briefs
on August 8, 2012. A public hearing was
held on September 7, 2012.
Scope Comments
We set aside a period of time in our
Initiation Notice for parties to raise
issues regarding product coverage, and
encouraged all parties to submit
comments within 20 calendar days of
publication of that notice.2 As described
in the Preliminary Determination, SeAH
VINA filed comments on December 5,
2011, urging the Department to modify
the scope description. No further
comments on this issue were received.
For the reasons explained in the
Preliminary Determination, the
Department is not adopting SeAH
VINA’s proposed modification of the
scope.
Scope of the Investigation
This investigation covers welded
carbon-quality steel pipes and tube, of
circular cross-section, with an outside
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
Case History
The following events have occurred
since the Preliminary Determination.1
1 See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe
from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and
Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty
Determination With Final Antidumping Duty
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:00 Oct 19, 2012
Jkt 229001
Determination, 77 FR 19211 (March 30, 2012)
(‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
2 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997), and Circular
Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India, the
Sultanate of Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of
Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 72173
(November 22, 2011).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64471
diameter (‘‘O.D.’’) not more than 16
inches (406.4 mm), regardless of wall
thickness, surface finish (e.g., black,
galvanized, or painted), end finish
(plain end, beveled end, grooved,
threaded, or threaded and coupled), or
industry specification (e.g., American
Society for Testing and Materials
International (‘‘ASTM’’), proprietary, or
other) generally known as standard
pipe, fence pipe and tube, sprinkler
pipe, and structural pipe (although
subject product may also be referred to
as mechanical tubing). Specifically, the
term ‘‘carbon quality’’ includes products
in which: (a) Iron predominates, by
weight, over each of the other contained
elements; (b) the carbon content is 2
percent or less, by weight; and (c) none
of the elements listed below exceeds the
quantity, by weight, as indicated:
(i) 1.80 percent of manganese;
(ii) 2.25 percent of silicon;
(iii) 1.00 percent of copper;
(iv) 0.50 percent of aluminum;
(v) 1.25 percent of chromium;
(vi) 0.30 percent of cobalt;
(vii) 0.40 percent of lead;
(viii) 1.25 percent of nickel;
(ix) 0.30 percent of tungsten;
(x) 0.15 percent of molybdenum;
(xi) 0.10 percent of niobium;
(xii) 0.41 percent of titanium;
(xiii) 0.15 percent of vanadium;
(xiv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
Subject pipe is ordinarily made to
ASTM specifications A53, A135, and
A795, but can also be made to other
specifications. Structural pipe is made
primarily to ASTM specifications A252
and A500. Standard and structural pipe
may also be produced to proprietary
specifications rather than to industry
specifications. Fence tubing is included
in the scope regardless of certification to
a specification listed in the exclusions
below, and can also be made to the
ASTM A513 specification. Sprinkler
pipe is designed for sprinkler fire
suppression systems and may be made
to industry specifications such as ASTM
A53 or to proprietary specifications.
These products are generally made to
standard O.D. and wall thickness
combinations. Pipe multi-stenciled to a
standard and/or structural specification
and to other specifications, such as
American Petroleum Institute (‘‘API’’)
API–5L specification, is also covered by
the scope of this investigation when it
meets the physical description set forth
above, and also has one or more of the
following characteristics: is 32 feet in
length or less; is less than 2.0 inches
(50mm) in outside diameter; has a
galvanized and/or painted (e.g.,
polyester coated) surface finish; or has
a threaded and/or coupled end finish.
E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM
22OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 204 (Monday, October 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64468-64471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25970]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-533-853]
Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') has determined
that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and
exporters of circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe (``circular
welded pipe'') from India. For information on the estimated
countervailing duty rates, see the ``Suspension of Liquidation''
section, below.
DATES: Effective Date: October 22, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Subler, Thomas Schauer, or David
Layton, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-0189, (202) 482-0410, and (202) 482-0371, respectively.
Petitioners
The petitioners in this investigation are Allied Tube and Conduit,
JMC Steel Group, United States Steel Corporation, and Wheatland Tube
Corporation (``Wheatland'') (collectively, ``Petitioners'').
Period of Investigation
The period for which we are measuring subsidies, or period of
investigation, is April 1, 2010, through March 31, 2011.
Case History
The following events have occurred since the publication of the
preliminary determination.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India:
Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and
Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determination With Final
Antidumping Duty Determination, 77 FR 19192 (March 30, 2012)
(``Preliminary Determination'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received a case brief from the Government of India (``GOI'') on
May 21, 2012. Wheatland submitted a rebuttal brief on May 29, 2012.
Zenith Birla (India) Ltd. (``Zenith'') submitted a case brief on
May 23, 2012. We rejected Zenith's case brief and removed it from the
record because it contained new factual information. We requested that
Zenith re-submit its case brief without the new factual information.\2\
Zenith did not re-submit its case brief. Accordingly, we did not
consider the arguments Zenith made in the case brief we rejected and
removed from the record of this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See letter from Susan Kuhbach to Zenith dated May 24, 2012,
and Memorandum from David Layton to File dated May 24, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The GOI and Wheatland each requested a hearing on April 30, 2012.
We held the hearing on August 6, 2012.
Scope of the Investigation
This investigation covers welded carbon-quality steel pipes and
tube, of circular cross-section, with an outside diameter (``O.D.'')
not more than 16 inches (406.4 mm), regardless of wall thickness,
surface finish (e.g., black, galvanized, or painted), end finish (plain
end, beveled end, grooved, threaded, or threaded and coupled), or
industry specification (e.g., American Society for Testing and
Materials International (``ASTM''), proprietary, or other) generally
known as standard pipe, fence pipe and tube, sprinkler pipe, and
structural pipe (although subject product may also be referred to as
mechanical tubing). Specifically, the term ``carbon quality'' includes
products in which: (a) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the
other contained elements; (b) the carbon content is 2 percent or less,
by weight; and (c) none of the elements listed below exceeds the
quantity, by weight, as indicated:
(i) 1.80 percent of manganese;
(ii) 2.25 percent of silicon;
(iii) 1.00 percent of copper;
(iv) 0.50 percent of aluminum;
(v) 1.25 percent of chromium;
[[Page 64469]]
(vi) 0.30 percent of cobalt;
(vii) 0.40 percent of lead;
(viii) 1.25 percent of nickel;
(ix) 0.30 percent of tungsten;
(x) 0.15 percent of molybdenum;
(xi) 0.10 percent of niobium;
(xii) 0.41 percent of titanium;
(xiii) 0.15 percent of vanadium;
(xiv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
Subject pipe is ordinarily made to ASTM specifications A53, A135,
and A795, but can also be made to other specifications. Structural pipe
is made primarily to ASTM specifications A252 and A500. Standard and
structural pipe may also be produced to proprietary specifications
rather than to industry specifications. Fence tubing is included in the
scope regardless of certification to a specification listed in the
exclusions below, and can also be made to the ASTM A513 specification.
Sprinkler pipe is designed for sprinkler fire suppression systems and
may be made to industry specifications such as ASTM A53 or to
proprietary specifications. These products are generally made to
standard O.D. and wall thickness combinations. Pipe multi-stenciled to
a standard and/or structural specification and to other specifications,
such as American Petroleum Institute (``API'') API-5L specification, is
also covered by the scope of this investigation when it meets the
physical description set forth above, and also has one or more of the
following characteristics: Is 32 feet in length or less; is less than
2.0 inches (50mm) in outside diameter; has a galvanized and/or painted
(e.g., polyester coated) surface finish; or has a threaded and/or
coupled end finish.
The scope of this investigation does not include: (a) Pipe suitable
for use in boilers, superheaters, heat exchangers, refining furnaces
and feedwater heaters, whether or not cold drawn; (b) finished
electrical conduit; (c) finished scaffolding; \3\ (d) tube and pipe
hollows for redrawing; (e) oil country tubular goods produced to API
specifications; (f) line pipe produced to only API specifications; and
(g) mechanical tubing, whether or not cold-drawn. However, products
certified to ASTM mechanical tubing specifications are not excluded as
mechanical tubing if they otherwise meet the standard sizes (e.g.,
outside diameter and wall thickness) of standard, structural, fence and
sprinkler pipe. Also, products made to the following outside diameter
and wall thickness combinations, which are recognized by the industry
as typical for fence tubing, would not be excluded from the scope based
solely on their being certified to ASTM mechanical tubing
specifications:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Finished scaffolding is defined as component parts of a
final, finished scaffolding that enters the United States
unassembled as a ``kit.'' A ``kit'' is understood to mean a packaged
combination of component parts that contain, at the time of
importation, all the necessary component parts to fully assemble a
final, finished scaffolding.
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.035 inch wall thickness (gage 20)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.083 inch wall thickness (gage 14)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.083 inch wall thickness (gage 14)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.120 inch wall thickness (gage 11)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.134 inch wall thickness (gage 10)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall thickness (gage 8)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.148 inch wall thickness (gage 9)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall thickness (gage 8)
4.000 inch O.D. and 0.148 inch wall thickness (gage 9)
4.000 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall thickness (gage 8)
4.500 inch O.D. and 0.203 inch wall thickness (gage 7)
The pipe subject to this investigation is currently classifiable in
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') statistical
reporting numbers 7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 7306.19.5110,
7306.19.5150, 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040,
7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, 7306.30.5090, 7306.50.1000, 7306.50.5050,
and 7306.50.5070. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the
merchandise under the investigation is dispositive.
Scope Comments
In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations, we
set aside a period of time in our initiation notice for parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage, and encouraged all parties to
submit comments within 20 calendar days of publication of that
notice.\4\ As described in the Preliminary Determination, SeAH Steel
VINA Corp. (``SeAH VINA'') filed comments on December 5, 2011, urging
the Department to modify the scope description. No further comments on
this issue were received. For the reasons explained in the Preliminary
Determination, the Department is not adopting SeAH VINA's proposed
modification of the scope.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296,
27323 (May 19, 1997), and Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe
From India, the Sultanate of Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigations, 76 FR 72173 (November 22, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury Test
Because India is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
``Act''), section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation.
Accordingly, the U.S. International Trade Commission (``ITC'') must
determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from India
materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. On
December 16, 2011, the ITC published its affirmative preliminary
determination that there is a reasonable indication that
[[Page 64470]]
an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of
allegedly subsidized imports of circular welded pipe from India.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India,
Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Vietnam; Determinations, 76 FR
78313 (December 16, 2011) and Investigation Nos. 701-TA-482-485 and
731-TA-1191-1194 (Preliminary) (December 12, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this investigation are addressed in the Memorandum from Christian
Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, entitled ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final
Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Circular
Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from India'' (October 15, 2012)
(hereafter ``Decision Memorandum''), which is hereby adopted by this
notice. Attached to this notice as an Appendix is a list of the issues
that parties have raised and to which we have responded in the Decision
Memorandum. This Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on
file electronically via Import Administration's Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA
ACCESS''). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at https://iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), room 7046
of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the
Internet at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum
and the electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Use of Adverse Facts Available
For purposes of this final determination, we have continued to rely
on facts available and to draw an adverse inference, in accordance with
sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, to determine the subsidy rates for
the mandatory respondents. For a full discussion of these issues, see
the Decision Memorandum, at ``Use of Facts Otherwise Available and
Adverse Facts Available.''
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we have
calculated individual rates for each producer/exporter of the subject
merchandise individually investigated. With respect to the all-others
rate, section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act provides that if the
countervailable subsidy rates established for all exporters and
producers individually investigated are determined entirely in
accordance with section 776 of the Act, the Department may use any
reasonable method to establish an all-others rate for exporters and
producers not individually investigated. The Court of International
Trade recently concluded that the statute permits the Department to use
mandatory respondents' AFA rates in the calculation of the all-others
rate.\6\ The Court found this methodology reasonable. In this case, the
rate calculated for both of the investigated companies is based
entirely on facts available under section 776 of the Act. There is no
other information on the record upon which to determine an all-others
rate. As a result, we have used the adverse facts available (``AFA'')
rate assigned for Lloyds Metals and Engineers Ltd. and Zenith as the
all-others rate. This method is consistent with the Department's past
practice.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See MacLean-Fogg Co. v United States, 836 F. Supp. 2d 1267,
1374-1375 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2012).
\7\ See, e.g., Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From
Argentina, 66 FR 37007, 37008 (July 16, 2001); see also Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Prestressed Concrete
Steel Wire Strand From India, 68 FR 68356 (December 8, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We determine the total countervailable subsidy rates to be as
follows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net subsidy
Exporter/manufacturer rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lloyds Metals and Engineers Ltd......................... 285.95
Zenith Birla (India) Ltd................................ 285.95
All Others.............................................. 285.95
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of our Preliminary Determination, we instructed U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to suspend liquidation of all
entries of circular welded pipe from India which were entered or
withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after March 30, 2012,
the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the
Federal Register, and to collect cash deposits or bonds in the amount
of the preliminary countervailing duty rates. In accordance with
section 703(d) of the Act, we later issued instructions to CBP to
discontinue the suspension of liquidation for countervailing duty
purposes for subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse on
or after July 28, 2012, but to continue the suspension of liquidation
of all entries from March 30, 2012 through July 27, 2012.
We will issue a countervailing duty order and reinstate the
suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act if the U.S.
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') issues a final affirmative
injury determination, and will require a cash deposit of estimated
countervailing duties for such entries in the amounts indicated above.
If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material
injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all
estimated deposits or securities posted as a result of the suspension
of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or
under an APO, without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary
for Import Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information
In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties
subject to an administrative protective order (``APO'') of their
responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is
subject to sanction.
This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and
777(i) of the Act.
Dated: October 15, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix
List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum
Comment 1 Whether the GOI Cooperated to the Best of Its Ability and
Should Not Be Subject to the AFA Rate that the Department
Preliminarily Applied
[[Page 64471]]
Comment 2 Whether the Application of the AFA Standard Is
Inconsistent with Article 12.7 of ASCM
Comment 3 Whether the Department's Application of AFA With Respect
to Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel by SAIL For LTAR Was Justified
Comment 4 Whether the Department's Application of AFA With Respect
to Provision of Land For LTAR Was Justified
Comment 5 Whether the Department Erred in Calculating the Subsidy
Rate It Assigned in the Preliminary Determination
[FR Doc. 2012-25970 Filed 10-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P