Finished Carbon Steel Flanges From India, Italy, and Spain: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 49619-49624 [2016-17931]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2016 / Notices The materials/components sourced from abroad include the following repower drivetrain components: Brake calipers; brake hydraulic power units; gearboxes; main bearings; main shafts; and, pillow blocks (duty rate ranges from duty-free to 5.8%). Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board’s Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is September 6, 2016. A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at Elizabeth.Whiteman@trade.gov or (202) 482–0473. Dated: July 25, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. payments on the foreign-status components used in export production. On its domestic sales, Adient would be able to choose the duty rate during customs entry procedures that applies to motorized seat adjusters (duty free) for the foreign-status electric seat adjuster motors (duty rate—2.8%). Customs duties also could possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign-status production equipment. Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board’s Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is September 6, 2016. A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the FTZ Board’s Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Diane Finver at Diane.Finver@trade.gov or (202) 482–1367. Dated: July 21, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2016–17892 Filed 7–27–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Foreign-Trade Zones Board DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 189—Kent/ Ottawa/Muskegon Counties, Michigan; Notification of Proposed Production Activity; Adient US LLC; Subzone 189D (Motorized Seat Adjusters for Motor Vehicles); Holland and Zeeland, Michigan Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES [B–46–2016] Foreign-Trade Zones Board Adient US LLC (Adient), owned by Johnson Controls, Inc., submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facilities within FTZ 189D, at sites in Holland and Zeeland, Michigan. The notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on July 13, 2016. The facilities are used for the production of motorized seat adjusters for motor vehicles. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ activity would be limited to the specific foreign-status components and specific finished product described in the submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized by the FTZ Board. Production under FTZ procedures could exempt Adient from customs duty VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:44 Jul 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 [S–50–2016] Approval of Subzone Status—Flemish Master Weavers—Sanford, Maine On April 21, 2016, the Executive Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board docketed an application submitted by the City of Waterville, grantee of FTZ 186, requesting subzone status subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 186, on behalf of Flemish Master Weavers in Sanford, Maine. The application was processed in accordance with the FTZ Act and Regulations, including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (81 FR 25374–25375, 04–28– 2016). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed the application and determined that it meets the criteria for approval. Pursuant to the authority delegated to the FTZ Board’s Executive Secretary (15 CFR 400.36(f)), the application to establish Subzone 186A is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, including section 400.13, and further subject to FTZ 186’s 2,000-acre activation limit. PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Dated: July 22, 2016. Elizabeth Whiteman, Acting Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2016–17891 Filed 7–27–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–871, A–475–835, A–469–815] Finished Carbon Steel Flanges From India, Italy, and Spain: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: July 20, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Baker at (202) 482–2924 (India); Moses Song or Edythe Artman at (202) 482– 5041 or (202) 482–3931, respectively (Italy); and Michael Heaney at (202) 482–4475 (Spain), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: The Petitions [FR Doc. 2016–17807 Filed 7–27–16; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 49619 Sfmt 4703 On June 30, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of finished carbon steel flanges (steel flanges) from India, Italy, and Spain, filed in proper form on behalf of Weldbend Corporation and Boltex Mfg. Co., L.P. (Petitioners).1 The Petitions were accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition on steel flanges from India.2 Petitioners are domestic producers of steel flanges.3 On July 6, 8, and 12, 2016, the Department requested additional information and clarification of certain areas of the Petitions.4 Petitioners filed 1 See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy and Spain and Countervailing Duties on Imports from India, dated June 30, 2016 (the Petitions). 2 Id. 3 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2, and Exhibit I–15. 4 See Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy, and Spain and Countervailing Duties on Imports from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 6, 2016 (General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 6, 2016 (India Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department E:\FR\FM\28JYN1.SGM Continued 28JYN1 49620 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2016 / Notices Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES responses to these requests on July 8 and 13, 2016, respectively.5 In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that imports of steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners supporting their allegations. The Department finds that Petitioners filed these Petitions on behalf of the to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 6, 2016 (Italy Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 6, 2016 (Spain Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy, and Spain and Countervailing Duties on Imports from India: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 8, 2016 (Second General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 12, 2016 (Italy Second Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 12, 2016 (Spain Second Supplemental Questionnaire). 5 See Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy and Spain: Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping Petition— General Questions,’’ dated July 8, 2016 (General Issues Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India: Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping Petition—General Questions,’’ dated July 8, 2016 (India Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy: Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping Petition—General Questions,’’ dated July 8, 2016 (Italy Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain: Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping Petition—General Questions,’’ dated July 8, 2016 (Spain Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy and Spain: 2nd Supplemental Questions Response,’’ dated July 13, 2016 (Second General Issues Supplement) see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from ltaly: 2nd Supplemental Questionnaire Response,’’ dated July 8, 2016 (Italy Second Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ‘‘Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain: 2nd Supplemental Questionnaire Response,’’ dated July 8, 2016 (Spain Second Supplement). VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:44 Jul 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 domestic industry because Petitioners are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also finds that Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that Petitioners are requesting.6 Period of Investigation Because the Petitions were filed on June 30, 2016, the period of investigation (POI) for each investigation is, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), April 1, 2015, through March 31, 2016. Scope of the Investigations The product covered by these investigations is steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ at Appendix I of this notice. Comments on Scope of the Investigations During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions to, and received responses from, Petitioners pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.7 As discussed in the preamble to the Department’s regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all comments received from parties and, if necessary, will consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information should be limited to public information. In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on August 9, 2016, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. EDT on August 19, 2016, which is 10 calendar days after the initial comments. The Department requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the 6 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions’’ section below. 7 See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire and Second General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also General Issues Supplement and Second General Issues Supplement. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 may contact the Department 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 the Department must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).8 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date when it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines. Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires The Department will be giving interested parties an opportunity to provide comments on the appropriate physical characteristics of steel flanges to be reported in response to the Department’s AD questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate productcomparison 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) productcomparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as productcomparison criteria. We base productcomparison criteria on meaningful 8 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the Department’s electronic filing requirements, which went into effect on 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%20on%20 Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf. E:\FR\FM\28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2016 / Notices Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES commercial differences among products. In other words, although there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe steel flanges, 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, the Department 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 questionnaires, all comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. EDT on August 9, 2016, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. EDT on August 19, 2016. All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of the India, Italy, and Spain less-than-fairvalue investigations, as well as the India countervailing duty investigation. Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions 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, the Department 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 the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:44 Jul 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 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 the Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,9 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department’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.10 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 Petitions). With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that steel flanges constitute a single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.11 In determining whether Petitioners have standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the section 771(10) of the Act. 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)). 11 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India (India AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy, and Spain (Attachment II); Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy (Italy AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain (Spain AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. PO 00000 9 See 10 See Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 49621 ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in Appendix I of this notice. Petitioners provided their production of the domestic like product in 2015,12 as well as an estimate of the total 2015 production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.13 To establish industry support, Petitioners compared their own production to the estimated total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.14 Our review of the data provided in the Petitions and other information readily available to the Department indicates that Petitioners have established industry support.15 First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).16 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 Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.17 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 Petitions 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 Petitions.18 Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the AD 12 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibits I–15– A and I–15–B. 13 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–15. 14 Id. 15 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, and Spain AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 16 See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, and Spain AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 17 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, and Spain AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 18 Id. E:\FR\FM\28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1 49622 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2016 / Notices investigations that they are requesting the Department initiate.19 Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation Petitioners allege 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 less than normal value (NV). In addition, Petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.20 Petitioners contend that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price suppression or depression, lost sales and revenues, declines in production, capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments, negative impact on employment variables, and decline in financial performance.21 We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.22 Allegations of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less-than-fair value upon which the Department based its decision to initiate investigations of imports of steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the country-specific initiation checklists. Export Price Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES For India, Italy, and Spain, Petitioners based export price (EP) U.S. prices on average unit values (AUVs) calculated using publicly available import statistics from the ITC’s Dataweb for each country under the relevant Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 19 See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, and Spain AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 20 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 18–19; see also General Issues Supplement, at 6 and Exhibit 3. 21 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 12–16, 18–34 and Exhibits I–2, I–9 and I–11 through I–14; see also General Issues Supplement, at 6 and Exhibit 3. 22 See India AD Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from the India, Italy, and Spain (Attachment III); see also Italy AD Checklist, at Attachment III; and Spain AD Checklist, at Attachment III. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:44 Jul 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 subheadings for steel flanges.23 To calculate ex-factory prices, Petitioners made deductions from U.S. price for movement expenses, consistent with the manner in which the data is reported in Dataweb.24 Normal Value For India and Italy, Petitioners provided home market price information obtained through market research for steel flanges produced and offered for sale in India and Italy,25 and supported this information with an affidavit or declaration from a market researcher for the price information.26 Petitioners made no adjustments to the India or Italy offer price to calculate NV, as none were warranted by the terms associated with the offers.27 Normal Value Based on Constructed Value Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost of manufacturing (COM), SG&A expenses, financial expenses, and packing expenses. Petitioners calculated COM based on Petitioners’ experience, adjusted for known differences between producing in the United States and producing in the respective country (i.e., Italy and Spain), during the proposed POI.28 Using publiclyavailable data to account for price differences, Petitioners multiplied the surrogate usage quantities by the submitted value of the inputs used to manufacture steel flanges in each country.29 For Italy and Spain, labor rates were derived from publicly available sources multiplied by the product-specific usage rates.30 For Italy and Spain, to determine factory overhead, SG&A, and financial expense rates, Petitioners relied on financial statements of companies that were producers of identical or comparable merchandise operating in the respective foreign country.31 For Italy, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), and 773(e) of the Act, Petitioners provided information that sales of steel flanges in the home market were made at prices below the cost of production (COP) and also calculated NV based on constructed value (CV).32 23 See India AD Checklist, Italy AD Checklist, and Spain AD Checklist. 24 Id. 25 See India AD Checklist and Italy AD Checklist. 26 See India AD Checklist, Italy AD Checklist, and Spain AD Checklist. 27 See India AD Checklist and Italy AD Checklist. 28 See Italy AD Checklist and Spain AD Checklist. 29 See Italy AD Checklist and Spain AD Checklist. 30 Id. 31 Id. 32 See Italy AD Checklist. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 For Spain, Petitioners were unable to obtain home market prices and, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, calculated NV based on CV.33 Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A expenses, financial expenses, packing expenses, and profit. Petitioners calculated CV using the same average COM, SG&A expenses, and financial expenses, used to calculate COP.34 Petitioners relied on the financial statements of the same producers that they used for calculating manufacturing overhead, SG&A expenses, and financial expenses to calculate the profit rate.35 Fair Value Comparisons Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to believe that imports of steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain, are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at lessthan-fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with section 773(a) of the Act, the estimated dumping margin(s) for steel flanges are as follows: (1) India ranges from 17.80 to 37.84 percent; 36 (2) Italy ranges from 15.76 percent to 204.53 percent; 37 and (3) Spain ranges from 13.19 percent to 24.43 percent.38 Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions on steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain, we find that Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of steel flanges for India, Italy, and Spain are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-thanfair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation. On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous amendments to the AD and CVD law.39 The 2015 law does not specify dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, the Department published an interpretative rule, in which it announced the applicability dates for 33 See 34 See Spain AD Checklist. Italy AD Checklist and Spain AD Checklist. 35 Id. 36 See India AD Checklist. Italy AD Checklist. 38 See Spain AD Checklist. 39 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). 37 See E:\FR\FM\28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2016 / Notices each amendment to the Act, except for amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act, which relate to determinations of material injury by the ITC.40 The amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to these AD investigations.41 Respondent Selection Petitioners named 31 companies in India, 26 companies in Italy, and 6 companies in Spain as producers/ exporters of steel flanges.42 Following standard practice in AD investigations involving market economy countries, in the event the Department determines that the number of companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company based upon the Department’s resources, where appropriate, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers listed with the scope in Appendix I, below. We also intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO on the record within five business days of publication of this Federal Register notice. Comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted seven calendar days after the placement of the CBP data on the record of these investigations. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit those comments five calendar days after the deadline for the initial comments. Comments for the above-referenced investigations must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the Department’s electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. EDT by the dates noted above. We intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Distribution of Copies of the Petitions In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version 40 See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice). 41 Id., at 46794–95. The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114thcongress/house-bill/1295/text/pl. 42 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–6, Exhibit I–7, and Exhibit I–8. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:44 Jul 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 of the Petitions have been provided to the governments of India, Italy, and Spain via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). ITC Notification We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determinations by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.43 A negative ITC determination for any country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country; 44 otherwise, these investigations 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 the Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)–(iv). Any party, when submitting factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 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. 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. Please review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. Extensions of Time Limits Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under part 351, or PO 00000 43 See section 733(a) of the Act. 44 Id. Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 49623 as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under part 351 expires. 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. 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 the letter or memorandum setting forth 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; under limited circumstances we will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/201322853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in this segment. Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.45 Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials, as well as their representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of Petitions filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final Rule.46 The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements. Notification to Interested Parties Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 45 See section 782(b) of the Act. 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. 46 See E:\FR\FM\28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1 49624 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 145 / Thursday, July 28, 2016 / Notices 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed in 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. Dated: July 20, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Appendix I—Scope of the Investigations The scope of these investigations covers finished carbon steel flanges. Finished carbon steel flanges differ from unfinished carbon steel flanges (also known as carbon steel flange forgings) in that they have undergone further processing after forging, including, but not limited to, beveling, bore threading, center or step boring, face machining, taper boring, machining ends or surfaces, drilling bolt holes, and/or deburring or shot blasting. Any one of these post-forging processes suffices to render the forging into a finished carbon steel flange for purposes of these investigations. However, mere heat treatment of a carbon steel flange forging (without any other further processing after forging) does not render the forging into a finished carbon steel flange for purposes of these investigations. While these finished carbon steel flanges are generally manufactured to specification ASME 816.5 or ASME 816.47 series A or series 8, the scope is not limited to flanges produced under those specifications. All types of finished carbon steel flanges are included in the scope regardless of pipe size (which may or may not be expressed in inches of nominal pipe size), pressure class (usually, but not necessarily, expressed in pounds of pressure, e.g., 150, 300, 400, 600, 900, 1500, 2500, etc.), type of face (e.g., flat face, full face, raised face, etc.), configuration (e.g., weld neck, slip on, socket weld, lap joint, threaded, etc.), wall thickness (usually, but not necessarily, expressed in inches), normalization, or whether or not heat treated. These carbon steel flanges either meet or exceed the requirements of the ASTM A105, ASTM A694, ASTM A181, ASTM A350 and ASTM A707 standards (or comparable foreign specifications). The scope includes any flanges produced to the above-referenced ASTM standards as currently stated or as may be amended. The term ‘‘carbon steel’’ under this scope is steel 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) 0.87 percent of aluminum; (ii) 0.0105 percent of boron; (iii) 10.10 percent of chromium; (iv) 1.55 percent of columbium; (v) 3.10 percent of copper; (vi) 0.38 percent of lead; (vii) 3.04 percent of manganese; (viii) 2.05 percent of molybdenum; VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:44 Jul 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 (ix) 20.15 percent of nickel; (x) 1.55 percent of niobium; (xi) 0.20 percent of nitrogen; (xii) 0.21 percent of phosphorus; (xiii) 3.10 percent of silicon; (xiv) 0.21 percent of sulfur; (xv) 1.05 percent of titanium; (xvi) 4.06 percent of tungsten; (xvii) 0.53 percent of vanadium; or (xviii) 0.015 percent of zirconium. Finished carbon steel flanges are currently classified under subheadings 7307.91.5010 and 7307.91.5050 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). They may also be entered under HTSUS subheadings 7307.91.5030 and 7307.91.5070. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2016–17931 Filed 7–27–16; 8:45 a.m.] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–044] Antidumping Duty Investigation of 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (R–134a) From the People’s Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: July 28, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith Haynes, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–5139. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On March 23, 2016, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) initiated an antidumping duty investigation on 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (‘‘R–134a’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1 The notice of initiation stated that, in accordance with section 733(b)(l)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), we would issue our preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of initiation, unless postponed. Currently, the preliminary determination in this investigation is due no later than August 1 See Antidumping Duty Investigation of 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (‘‘R–134a’’) from the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 81 FR 18830 (April 1, 2016). PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 10, 2016. On July 13, 2016, the American HFC Coalition and its individual members,2 as well as District Lodge 154 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’), requested that the Department postpone its preliminary determination for the above mentioned investigation. Postponement of Preliminary Determination Section 733(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to issue the preliminary determination in an antidumping duty investigation within 140 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. However, if the petitioner makes a timely request for a postponement, section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act allows the Department to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 190 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. On July 13, 2016, Petitioners submitted a timely request pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e).3 The Department finds that there are no compelling reasons to deny Petitioners’ request. The Department is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination to no later than 190 days after the day on which the investigation was initiated, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department will issue the preliminary determination in this investigation no later than September 29, 2016. In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determination of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination, unless postponed at a later date. This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). Dated: July 21, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2016–17805 Filed 7–27–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 2 The individual members of the American HFC Coalition are: Amtrol Inc., Arkema Inc., The Chemours Company FC LLC, Honeywell International Inc., Hudson Technologies, Mexichem Fluor Inc., and Worthington Industries, Inc. 3 See letter from Petitioners, ‘‘1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (R–134a) from the People’s Republic of China: Petitioners’ Request for Extension of the Antidumping Investigation Preliminary Determination,’’ dated July 13, 2016. E:\FR\FM\28JYN1.SGM 28JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 145 (Thursday, July 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49619-49624]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17931]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-871, A-475-835, A-469-815]


Finished Carbon Steel Flanges From India, Italy, and Spain: 
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: July 20, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Baker at (202) 482-2924 (India); 
Moses Song or Edythe Artman at (202) 482-5041 or (202) 482-3931, 
respectively (Italy); and Michael Heaney at (202) 482-4475 (Spain), AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petitions

    On June 30, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of finished 
carbon steel flanges (steel flanges) from India, Italy, and Spain, 
filed in proper form on behalf of Weldbend Corporation and Boltex Mfg. 
Co., L.P. (Petitioners).\1\ The Petitions were accompanied by a 
countervailing duty (CVD) petition on steel flanges from India.\2\ 
Petitioners are domestic producers of steel flanges.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy and Spain 
and Countervailing Duties on Imports from India, dated June 30, 2016 
(the Petitions).
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2, and Exhibit I-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 6, 8, and 12, 2016, the Department requested additional 
information and clarification of certain areas of the Petitions.\4\ 
Petitioners filed

[[Page 49620]]

responses to these requests on July 8 and 13, 2016, respectively.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled 
``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy, and Spain and 
Countervailing Duties on Imports from India: Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated July 6, 2016 (General Issues Supplemental 
Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department to Petitioners 
entitled ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India: Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated July 6, 2016 (India Supplemental Questionnaire); 
see also Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled 
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy: Supplemental Questions,'' 
dated July 6, 2016 (Italy Supplemental Questionnaire); see also 
Letter from the Department to Petitioners entitled ``Petition for 
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon 
Steel Flanges from Spain: Supplemental Questions,'' dated July 6, 
2016 (Spain Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the 
Department to Petitioners entitled ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from 
India, Italy, and Spain and Countervailing Duties on Imports from 
India: Supplemental Questions,'' dated July 8, 2016 (Second General 
Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the 
Department to Petitioners entitled ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from 
Italy: Supplemental Questions,'' dated July 12, 2016 (Italy Second 
Supplemental Questionnaire); see also Letter from the Department to 
Petitioners entitled ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping 
Duties on Imports of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy: 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated July 12, 2016 (Spain Second 
Supplemental Questionnaire).
    \5\ See Letter from Petitioner to the Department entitled ``Re: 
Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy and Spain: 
Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping 
Petition--General Questions,'' dated July 8, 2016 (General Issues 
Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department 
entitled ``Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India: 
Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping 
Petition--General Questions,'' dated July 8, 2016 (India 
Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department 
entitled ``Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Italy: 
Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping 
Petition--General Questions,'' dated July 8, 2016 (Italy 
Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department 
entitled ``Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain: 
Supplemental Questionnaire Response Regarding the Antidumping 
Petition--General Questions,'' dated July 8, 2016 (Spain 
Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the Department 
entitled ``Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy and 
Spain: 2nd Supplemental Questions Response,'' dated July 13, 2016 
(Second General Issues Supplement) see also Letter from Petitioner 
to the Department entitled ``Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from 
ltaly: 2nd Supplemental Questionnaire Response,'' dated July 8, 2016 
(Italy Second Supplement); see also Letter from Petitioner to the 
Department entitled ``Re: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain: 
2nd Supplemental Questionnaire Response,'' dated July 8, 2016 (Spain 
Second Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioners allege that imports of steel flanges 
from India, Italy, and Spain are being, or are likely to be, sold in 
the United States at less-than-fair value within the meaning of section 
731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or 
threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, 
consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are 
accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners 
supporting their allegations.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed these Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also 
finds that Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with 
respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that Petitioners are 
requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on June 30, 2016, the period of 
investigation (POI) for each investigation is, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.204(b)(1), April 1, 2015, through March 31, 2016.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is steel flanges from 
India, Italy, and Spain. For a full description of the scope of these 
investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' at Appendix I 
of this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, Petitioners pertaining to the proposed 
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would be an 
accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is 
seeking relief.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire and Second 
General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also General Issues 
Supplement and Second General Issues Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all 
comments received from parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If 
scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), 
all such factual information should be limited to public information. 
In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the 
Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 
5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on August 9, 2016, which is 20 
calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal 
comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 
p.m. EDT on August 19, 2016, which is 10 calendar days after the 
initial comments.
    The Department 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 may contact the Department 
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 the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\8\ An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date when it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic 
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) 
with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011) for details of the 
Department's electronic filing requirements, which went into effect 
on 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%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires

    The Department will be giving interested parties an opportunity to 
provide comments on the appropriate physical characteristics of steel 
flanges to be reported in response to the Department's AD 
questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key 
physical characteristics of the merchandise under consideration 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

[[Page 49621]]

commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe steel flanges, 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, the Department 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 questionnaires, all comments must be 
filed by 5:00 p.m. EDT on August 9, 2016, which is 20 calendar days 
from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments must be 
filed by 5:00 p.m. EDT on August 19, 2016. All comments and submissions 
to the Department must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as 
explained above, on the records of the India, Italy, and Spain less-
than-fair-value investigations, as well as the India countervailing 
duty investigation.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    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, the Department 
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 the Department 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 the Department and 
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\9\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department'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.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \10\ 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)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 
Petitions).
    With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer 
a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of 
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted 
on the record, we have determined that steel flanges constitute a 
single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in 
terms of that domestic like product.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India (India AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Finished 
Carbon Steel Flanges from India, Italy, and Spain (Attachment II); 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Finished Carbon 
Steel Flanges from Italy (Italy AD Initiation Checklist), at 
Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from Spain (Spain AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated 
concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. 
Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the 
Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce 
building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether Petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in Appendix I of 
this notice. Petitioners provided their production of the domestic like 
product in 2015,\12\ as well as an estimate of the total 2015 
production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry.\13\ To establish industry support, Petitioners compared their 
own production to the estimated total production of the domestic like 
product for the entire domestic industry.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibits I-15-A and I-15-
B.
    \13\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-15.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions and other 
information readily available to the Department indicates that 
Petitioners have established industry support.\15\ First, the Petitions 
established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for 
more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further 
action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\16\ 
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 Petitions 
account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic 
like product.\17\ 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 Petitions 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 Petitions.\18\ 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) 
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Spain AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \16\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also India AD 
Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, and Spain AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \17\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Spain AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf 
of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined 
in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the AD

[[Page 49622]]

investigations that they are requesting the Department initiate.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Spain AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    Petitioners allege 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 less than normal value (NV). In addition, Petitioners allege 
that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for 
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 18-19; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 6 and Exhibit 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price suppression 
or depression, lost sales and revenues, declines in production, 
capacity utilization, and U.S. shipments, negative impact on employment 
variables, and decline in financial performance.\21\ We have assessed 
the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, 
threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that 
these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet 
the statutory requirements for initiation.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 12-16, 18-34 and Exhibits 
I-2, I-9 and I-11 through I-14; see also General Issues Supplement, 
at 6 and Exhibit 3.
    \22\ See India AD Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Finished 
Carbon Steel Flanges from the India, Italy, and Spain (Attachment 
III); see also Italy AD Checklist, at Attachment III; and Spain AD 
Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less-
than-fair value upon which the Department based its decision to 
initiate investigations of imports of steel flanges from India, Italy, 
and Spain. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments 
relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the 
country-specific initiation checklists.

Export Price

    For India, Italy, and Spain, Petitioners based export price (EP) 
U.S. prices on average unit values (AUVs) calculated using publicly 
available import statistics from the ITC's Dataweb for each country 
under the relevant Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) subheadings for steel flanges.\23\ To calculate ex-factory 
prices, Petitioners made deductions from U.S. price for movement 
expenses, consistent with the manner in which the data is reported in 
Dataweb.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See India AD Checklist, Italy AD Checklist, and Spain AD 
Checklist.
    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    For India and Italy, Petitioners provided home market price 
information obtained through market research for steel flanges produced 
and offered for sale in India and Italy,\25\ and supported this 
information with an affidavit or declaration from a market researcher 
for the price information.\26\ Petitioners made no adjustments to the 
India or Italy offer price to calculate NV, as none were warranted by 
the terms associated with the offers.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See India AD Checklist and Italy AD Checklist.
    \26\ See India AD Checklist, Italy AD Checklist, and Spain AD 
Checklist.
    \27\ See India AD Checklist and Italy AD Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost 
of manufacturing (COM), SG&A expenses, financial expenses, and packing 
expenses. Petitioners calculated COM based on Petitioners' experience, 
adjusted for known differences between producing in the United States 
and producing in the respective country (i.e., Italy and Spain), during 
the proposed POI.\28\ Using publicly-available data to account for 
price differences, Petitioners multiplied the surrogate usage 
quantities by the submitted value of the inputs used to manufacture 
steel flanges in each country.\29\ For Italy and Spain, labor rates 
were derived from publicly available sources multiplied by the product-
specific usage rates.\30\ For Italy and Spain, to determine factory 
overhead, SG&A, and financial expense rates, Petitioners relied on 
financial statements of companies that were producers of identical or 
comparable merchandise operating in the respective foreign country.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Italy AD Checklist and Spain AD Checklist.
    \29\ See Italy AD Checklist and Spain AD Checklist.
    \30\ Id.
    \31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Italy, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), and 773(e) of 
the Act, Petitioners provided information that sales of steel flanges 
in the home market were made at prices below the cost of production 
(COP) and also calculated NV based on constructed value (CV).\32\ For 
Spain, Petitioners were unable to obtain home market prices and, 
pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, 
calculated NV based on CV.\33\ Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, 
CV consists of the COM, SG&A expenses, financial expenses, packing 
expenses, and profit. Petitioners calculated CV using the same average 
COM, SG&A expenses, and financial expenses, used to calculate COP.\34\ 
Petitioners relied on the financial statements of the same producers 
that they used for calculating manufacturing overhead, SG&A expenses, 
and financial expenses to calculate the profit rate.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See Italy AD Checklist.
    \33\ See Spain AD Checklist.
    \34\ See Italy AD Checklist and Spain AD Checklist.
    \35\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain, are 
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair 
value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with section 
773(a) of the Act, the estimated dumping margin(s) for steel flanges 
are as follows: (1) India ranges from 17.80 to 37.84 percent; \36\ (2) 
Italy ranges from 15.76 percent to 204.53 percent; \37\ and (3) Spain 
ranges from 13.19 percent to 24.43 percent.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See India AD Checklist.
    \37\ See Italy AD Checklist.
    \38\ See Spain AD Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions on steel flanges 
from India, Italy, and Spain, we find that Petitions meet the 
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD 
investigations to determine whether imports of steel flanges for India, 
Italy, and Spain are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United 
States at less-than-fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) 
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our 
preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of 
this initiation.
    On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into 
law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD law.\39\ The 2015 law does not specify 
dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, the 
Department published an interpretative rule, in which it announced the 
applicability dates for

[[Page 49623]]

each amendment to the Act, except for amendments contained in section 
771(7) of the Act, which relate to determinations of material injury by 
the ITC.\40\ The amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of 
the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 
2015, and, therefore, apply to these AD investigations.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \40\ See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension 
Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice).
    \41\ Id., at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondent Selection

    Petitioners named 31 companies in India, 26 companies in Italy, and 
6 companies in Spain as producers/exporters of steel flanges.\42\ 
Following standard practice in AD investigations involving market 
economy countries, in the event the Department determines that the 
number of companies is large and it cannot individually examine each 
company based upon the Department's resources, where appropriate, the 
Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers listed with the 
scope in Appendix I, below. We also intend to release the CBP data 
under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access 
to information protected by APO on the record within five business days 
of publication of this Federal Register notice. Comments regarding the 
CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted seven calendar 
days after the placement of the CBP data on the record of these 
investigations. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should 
submit those comments five calendar days after the deadline for the 
initial comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-6, Exhibit I-7, 
and Exhibit I-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments for the above-referenced investigations must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be 
received successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic 
records system, ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. EDT by the dates noted above. We 
intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 
days of publication of this notice.

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of India, Italy, and Spain via ACCESS. To 
the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public 
version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as 
provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of steel flanges from India, Italy, and Spain 
are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. 
industry.\43\ A negative ITC determination for any country will result 
in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country; 
\44\ otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \44\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors 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 the Department; and (v) evidence other than 
factual information described in (i)-(iv). Any party, when submitting 
factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 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. 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. Please review the regulations prior to 
submitting factual information in these investigations.

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under part 351, or as otherwise 
specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time 
limit established under part 351 expires. 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. 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 the letter or memorandum setting 
forth 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; under limited 
circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension 
of time limits. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 
57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual 
information in this segment.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\45\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their 
representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of Petitions 
filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD 
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the 
formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final 
Rule.\46\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \46\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the 
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January

[[Page 49624]]

22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations 
should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures 
(e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed in 19 CFR 
351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

    Dated: July 20, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I--Scope of the Investigations

    The scope of these investigations covers finished carbon steel 
flanges. Finished carbon steel flanges differ from unfinished carbon 
steel flanges (also known as carbon steel flange forgings) in that 
they have undergone further processing after forging, including, but 
not limited to, beveling, bore threading, center or step boring, 
face machining, taper boring, machining ends or surfaces, drilling 
bolt holes, and/or de-burring or shot blasting. Any one of these 
post-forging processes suffices to render the forging into a 
finished carbon steel flange for purposes of these investigations. 
However, mere heat treatment of a carbon steel flange forging 
(without any other further processing after forging) does not render 
the forging into a finished carbon steel flange for purposes of 
these investigations.
    While these finished carbon steel flanges are generally 
manufactured to specification ASME 816.5 or ASME 816.47 series A or 
series 8, the scope is not limited to flanges produced under those 
specifications. All types of finished carbon steel flanges are 
included in the scope regardless of pipe size (which may or may not 
be expressed in inches of nominal pipe size), pressure class 
(usually, but not necessarily, expressed in pounds of pressure, 
e.g., 150, 300, 400, 600, 900, 1500, 2500, etc.), type of face 
(e.g., flat face, full face, raised face, etc.), configuration 
(e.g., weld neck, slip on, socket weld, lap joint, threaded, etc.), 
wall thickness (usually, but not necessarily, expressed in inches), 
normalization, or whether or not heat treated. These carbon steel 
flanges either meet or exceed the requirements of the ASTM A105, 
ASTM A694, ASTM A181, ASTM A350 and ASTM A707 standards (or 
comparable foreign specifications). The scope includes any flanges 
produced to the above-referenced ASTM standards as currently stated 
or as may be amended. The term ``carbon steel'' under this scope is 
steel 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) 0.87 percent of aluminum;
    (ii) 0.0105 percent of boron;
    (iii) 10.10 percent of chromium;
    (iv) 1.55 percent of columbium;
    (v) 3.10 percent of copper;
    (vi) 0.38 percent of lead;
    (vii) 3.04 percent of manganese;
    (viii) 2.05 percent of molybdenum;
    (ix) 20.15 percent of nickel;
    (x) 1.55 percent of niobium;
    (xi) 0.20 percent of nitrogen;
    (xii) 0.21 percent of phosphorus;
    (xiii) 3.10 percent of silicon;
    (xiv) 0.21 percent of sulfur;
    (xv) 1.05 percent of titanium;
    (xvi) 4.06 percent of tungsten;
    (xvii) 0.53 percent of vanadium; or
    (xviii) 0.015 percent of zirconium.
Finished carbon steel flanges are currently classified under 
subheadings 7307.91.5010 and 7307.91.5050 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). They may also be entered 
under HTSUS subheadings 7307.91.5030 and 7307.91.5070. The HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the 
written description of the scope is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2016-17931 Filed 7-27-16; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P