Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigation, 37053-37058 [2017-16770]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2017 / Notices
shall be assessed at rates equal to the
cash deposit of estimated antidumping
duties required at the time of entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). The Department
intends to issue appropriate assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during this review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under an APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3),
which continues to govern the business
proprietary information in this segment
of the proceeding. Timely written
notification of the return or 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
sanctionable violation.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 75l(a)(l) and
777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.213(d)(4).
Dated: August 2, 2017.
James Maeder,
Senior Director, performing the duties of
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2017–16689 Filed 8–7–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
International Trade Administration
[A–570–062]
Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings From the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation
of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigation
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable August 2, 2017.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:16 Aug 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sergio Balbontin at (202) 482–6478 or
Denisa Ursu at (202) 482–2285, AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement & Compliance,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On July 13, 2017, the Department of
Commerce (the Department) received an
antidumping duty (AD) petition
concerning imports of cast iron soil pipe
fittings (soil pipe fittings) from the
People’s Republic of China (the PRC),
filed in proper form, on behalf of the
Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute (the
petitioner).1 The petitioner is a trade
association, whose members are all
domestic producers of soil pipe
fittings.2 The AD petition was
accompanied by a countervailing duty
(CVD) petition for soil pipe fittings from
the PRC.3
On July 17, 2017, the petitioner filed
an amendment to Volume I of the
Petition.4 On July 18, 2017, the
Department requested additional
information and clarification of certain
areas of the Petition.5 The petitioner
filed responses to these requests on July
20, 2017.6 In response to the
Department’s further requests for
information and clarification of Volume
II of the Petition,7 the petitioner
1 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties: Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from the
People’s Republic of China,’’ dated July 13, 2017
(the Petition).
2 See Volume I of the Petition at 2. The individual
members of the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute are
AB&I Foundry, Charlotte Pipe & Foundry, and Tyler
Pipe.
3 See Volume III of the Petition.
4 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Amendment to
Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties: Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings
from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated July 17,
2017 (Petition Amendment).
5 See Letters from the Department, ‘‘Petition for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports
of Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from the People’s
Republic of China: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated
July 18, 2017, and ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports
of Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from the People’s
Republic of China: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated
July 18, 2017.
6 See Letters from the petitioner ‘‘Cast Iron Soil
Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China:
Response to Supplemental Questions—General
Issues,’’ dated July 20, 2017 (General Issues
Supplement), and ‘‘Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from
the People’s Republic of China: Response to
Supplemental Questions—Antidumping Duties,’’
dated July 20, 2017 (AD Supplemental Response 1).
7 See Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Telephone Call
Regarding Financial Ratios,’’ dated July 24, 2017;
Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Telephone Call with
Petitioner’s Counsel Regarding Amendments to the
Petition,’’ dated July 26, 2017; and Memorandum to
the File, ‘‘Telephone Call with Petitioner’s Counsel
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37053
submitted additional amendments to the
Petition on July 26, 2017, and July 28,
2017.8
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioner alleges that imports
of soil pipe fittings from the PRC 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 Petition
is accompanied by information
reasonably available to the petitioner
supporting its allegations.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because the
petitioner is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act.
The Department also finds that the
petitioner demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
initiation of the AD investigation that
the petitioner is requesting.9
Period of Investigation
Because the Petition was filed on July
13, 2017, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.204(b)(1), the period of
investigation (POI) is January 1, 2017,
through June 30, 2017.
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this
investigation is soil pipe fittings from
the PRC. For a full description of the
scope of this investigation, see the
‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in the
Appendix to this notice.
Comments on Scope of the Investigation
During our review of the Petition, the
Department discussed with the
petitioner the language pertaining to the
proposed scope to ensure that the scope
language in the Petition would be an
accurate reflection of the products for
which the domestic industry is seeking
Regarding Questions for the Normal Value
Calculation,’’ dated July 27, 2017.
8 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Cast Iron Soil
Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China:
Response to Supplemental Questions—
Antidumping Duties,’’ dated July 26, 2017 (AD
Supplemental Response 2); and Letter from the
petitioner, ‘‘Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from the
People’s Republic of China: Revised Antidumping
Calculation,’’ dated July 28, 2017 (AD
Supplemental Response 3).
9 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition’’ section, below.
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
37054
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2017 / Notices
relief.10 On July 20, 2017, the petitioner
filed a revision to the scope language.11
As discussed in the preamble to the
Department’s regulations,12 we are
setting aside a period for interested
parties to raise issues regarding product
coverage (i.e., scope). The Department
will consider all comments received
from interested parties and, if necessary,
will consult with the interested parties
prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determination. If scope comments
include factual information,13 all such
factual information should be limited to
public information. In order to facilitate
preparation of its questionnaire, the
Department requests all interested
parties to submit such comments by
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on
Tuesday, August 22, 2017, 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. ET on Friday,
September 1, 2017, which is 10 calendar
days from the deadline for initial
comments.14 All such comments must
be filed on the record of each of the
concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
The Department requests that any
factual information the parties consider
relevant to the scope of the investigation
be submitted during this time period.
However, if a party subsequently finds
that additional factual information
pertaining to the scope of the
investigation may be relevant, the party
may contact the Department and request
permission to submit the additional
information. As stated above, all such
comments must be filed on the record
of each of the concurrent AD and CVD
investigations.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department
must be filed electronically using
Enforcement & Compliance’s
Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
Duty Centralized Electronic Service
System (ACCESS).15 An electronically10 See Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Antidumping
Duty Investigation of Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from
the People’s Republic of China: Telephone Call
with Petitioner, Re: Scope of the Investigation,’’
dated July 18, 2017.
11 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Response to
Supplemental Questions—Scope,’’ dated July 20,
2017 (Scope Supplement).
12 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing
Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
13 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21).
14 See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
15 See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing
requirements); see also 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:16 Aug 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 &
Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, Room
18022, U.S. Department of Commerce,
1401 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 requests comments
from interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of
soil pipe fittings to be reported in
response to the Department’s AD
questionnaire. This information will be
used to identify the key physical
characteristics of the merchandise under
consideration in order to report the
relevant factors and costs of production
accurately as well as to develop
appropriate product-comparison
criteria.
Interested parties will have the
opportunity to provide any information
or comments that they feel are relevant
to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically,
they may provide comments as to which
characteristics are appropriate to use as:
(1) General product characteristics; and
(2) product-comparison criteria. We
note that it is not always appropriate to
use all product characteristics as
product-comparison criteria. We base
product-comparison criteria on
meaningful commercial differences
among products. In other words,
although there may be some physical
product characteristics used by
manufacturers to describe soil pipe
fittings, 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 questionnaire, all
comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET
on August 17, 2017. Any rebuttal
comments, which may include factual
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m.
ET on August 24, 2017. All comments
and submissions to the Department
must be filed electronically using
ACCESS, as explained above, on the
record of the less-than-fair-value
investigation.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act provides that a petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) At least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D)
of the Act provides that, if the petition
does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product,
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,16 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.17
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
16 See
https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a handbook
can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/
Handbook%20on%20Electronic
%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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)).
17 See
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2017 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
which is like, or in the absence of like,
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the
reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’
(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in the Petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, the petitioner does not offer a
definition of the domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that soil
pipe fittings, as defined in the scope,
constitute a single domestic like
product, and we have analyzed industry
support in terms of that domestic like
product.18
In determining whether the petitioner
has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act, we considered the industry
support data contained in the Petition
and the petitioner’s subsequent
submissions with reference to the
domestic like product as defined in the
‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in
Appendix I of this notice. The petitioner
provided the 2016 production of the
domestic like product by its members.19
The petitioner states that its members
are the only known producers of soil
pipe fittings in the United States;
therefore, the Petition is supported by
100 percent of the U.S. industry.20
Our review of the data provided in the
Petition, Petition Amendment, General
Issues Supplement, and other
information readily available to the
Department indicates that the petitioner
has established industry support for the
Petition.21 First, the Petition established
support from domestic producers (or
workers) accounting for more than 50
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product and, as such, the
Department is not required to take
further action in order to evaluate
18 For a discussion of the domestic like product
analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Cast Iron Soil
Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China
(Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of
Industry Support for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Cast Iron
Soil Pipe Fittings (Soil Pipe Fittings) from the
People’s Republic of China (Attachment II). This
checklist is 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.
19 See Petition Amendment at 2; see also General
Issues Supplement at 1.
20 See Petition at 2; see also General Issues
Supplement at 1 and Exhibit 2.
21 See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:16 Aug 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
industry support (e.g., polling).22
Second, the domestic producers (or
workers) have met the statutory criteria
for industry support under section
732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the
domestic producers (or workers) who
support the Petition account for at least
25 percent of the total production of the
domestic like product.23 Finally, the
domestic producers (or workers) have
met the statutory criteria for industry
support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of
the Act because the domestic producers
(or workers) who support the Petition
account for more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the Petition.24 Accordingly, the
Department determines that the Petition
was filed on behalf of the domestic
industry within the meaning of section
732(b)(1) of the Act.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(E) of the Act, and it has
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the AD
investigation that it is requesting that
the Department initiate.25
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal
value (NV). In addition, the petitioner
alleges that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.26
The petitioner contends that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share;
underselling and price depression or
suppression; lost sales and revenues;
and negative impact on profit.27 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
22 See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
23 See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
24 Id.
25 Id.
26 See Volume I of the Petition at 11–12; see also
General Issues Supplement at 3 and Exhibit 3.
27 See Volume I of the Petition at 9, 11–20, and
Exhibits I–5 and I–7; see also Petition Amendment
at 1–3; see also General Issues Supplement at 3 and
Exhibit 3.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37055
by adequate evidence, and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation.28
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 the AD investigation
of imports of soil pipe fittings from the
PRC. The sources of data for the
deductions and adjustments relating to
U.S. price and NV are discussed in
greater detail in the Initiation
Checklist.29
Export Price
The petitioner based the U.S. price on
export price (EP) using average unit
values (AUVs) of publicly available
import data.30 The petitioner made
deductions to U.S. price for foreign
inland freight and brokerage and
handling.31
Normal Value
The petitioner stated that the
Department has consistently treated the
PRC as a non-market economy (NME)
country.32 In accordance with section
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the
presumption of NME status remains in
effect until revoked by the Department.
The presumption of NME status for the
PRC has not been revoked by the
Department and, therefore, remains in
effect for purposes of the initiation of
this investigation. Accordingly, the NV
of the product is appropriately based on
factors of production (FOPs) valued in
a surrogate market economy country, in
accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act.
The petitioner argues that South
Africa is an appropriate surrogate
country for the PRC because it is a
market economy that is at a level of
economic development comparable to
that of the PRC, it is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise,
and public information from South
Africa is available to value all FOPs.33
Based on the information provided by
the petitioner, we determine that it is
appropriate to use South Africa as a
surrogate country for the PRC. Interested
parties will have the opportunity to
28 See Initiation Checklist at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Cast Iron
Soil Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of
China.
29 Id., at 6–10.
30 See the attachment to AD Supplemental
Response 3.
31 Id.
32 See Volume II of the Petition at 1.
33 See AD Supplemental Response 2 at 2–3 and
Exhibits 2–5.
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
37056
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2017 / Notices
submit comments regarding surrogate
country selection and, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided
an opportunity to submit publicly
available information to value FOPs no
later than 30 days before the scheduled
date of the preliminary determination.
Factors of Production
Because information regarding the
volume of inputs consumed by Chinese
producers/exporters is not reasonably
available, the petitioner based the FOPs
for materials, labor, and energy on the
production experience of one of its
member companies.34 The petitioner
asserts that the production process for
soil pipe fittings is similar regardless of
whether the product is produced in the
United States or in the PRC.35 The
petitioner valued the estimated FOPs
using surrogate values from South
Africa.
Valuation of Raw Materials
The petitioner valued direct materials
based on publicly-available import data
for South Africa obtained from the
Global Trade Atlas (GTA) for the period
November 2016 through April 2017.36
The petitioner excluded all import data
from countries previously determined
by the Department to maintain broadly
available, non-industry-specific export
subsidies and countries previously
determined by the Department to be
NME countries.37 In addition, in
accordance with the Department’s
practice, the petitioner excluded
imports that were labeled as originating
from an unidentified country.38
Valuation of Labor
The petitioner relied on 2012 data
published by the International Labor
Organization, inflated to 2017 using the
South African Consumer Price Index.39
Valuation of Energy
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
The petitioner valued natural gas
using GTA import data.40 The petitioner
valued electricity using values reported
in the Eskom 2016/2017 Tariff Book.41
34 See Volume II of the Petition at 4 and Exhibit
II–7. See also AD Supplemental Response 2 at 1, 3,
and Exhibit 1.
35 See AD Supplemental Response 1 at Exhibit 3.
36 See AD Supplemental Response 2 at 3 and
Exhibit 7. In the narrative, the petitioner
erroneously reported September 2016 through
February 2017.
37 Id.
38 Id.
39 Id., at Exhibit 10.
40 Id., at Exhibit 7.
41 Id., at Exhibit 9.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:16 Aug 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
Valuation of Factory Overhead, Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses,
and Profit
The petitioner calculated ratios for
selling, general, and administrative
expenses, and profit based on the 2016
consolidated financial statements of
Tata Africa Steel Processors Proprietary
Ltd., a South African steel processor and
producer of aluminum wire rods.42
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
petitioner, there is reason to believe that
imports of soil pipe fittings from the
PRC 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(c) of
the Act, the estimated dumping margin
for soil pipe fittings from the PRC is
92.48 percent.43
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigation
Based upon the examination of the
AD Petition on soil pipe fittings from
the PRC, we find that the Petition meets
the requirements of section 732 of the
Act. Therefore, we are initiating an AD
investigation to determine whether
imports of soil pipe fittings from the
PRC 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 determination no
later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Under the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015, numerous
amendments to the AD and CVD laws
were made.44 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 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.45 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
this AD investigation.46
42 Id.,
at Exhibit 11.
the attachment to AD Supplemental
Response 3.
44 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015,
Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
45 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).
46 Id., at 46794–95. The 2015 amendments may be
found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114thcongress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
43 See
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Respondent Selection
The petitioner named 22 companies
in the PRC as producers/exporters of
soil pipe fittings.47 In accordance with
our standard practice for respondent
selection in cases involving NME
countries, we intend to issue quantity
and value (Q&V) questionnaires to
producers/exporters of merchandise
subject to this investigation and, in the
event we determine to limit the number
of companies individually examined,
base respondent selection on the
responses received.48 For this
investigation, the Department will
request Q&V information from known
exporters and producers identified, with
complete contact information, in the
Petition. In addition, the Department
will post the Q&V questionnaire along
with filing instructions on the
Enforcement & Compliance Web site at
https://www.trade.gov/enforcement/
news.asp.
Exporters/producers of soil pipe
fittings from the PRC that do not receive
Q&V questionnaires by mail may still
submit a response to the Q&V
questionnaire and can obtain a copy
from the Enforcement & Compliance
Web site. The Q&V response must be
submitted by all PRC exporters/
producers no later than August 14,
2017. All Q&V responses must be filed
electronically via ACCESS.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status
in an NME investigation, exporters and
producers must submit a separate-rate
application.49 The specific requirements
for submitting a separate-rate
application are outlined in detail in the
application itself, which is available on
the Department’s Web site at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-seprate.html. The separate-rate application
will be due 30 days after publication of
this initiation notice.50 Exporters and
producers who submit a separate-rate
application and are selected as
mandatory respondents will be eligible
for consideration for separate-rate status
only if they respond to all parts of the
47 See
Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I–4.
e.g., Carton-Closing Staples From the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation, 82 FR 19351 (April 27,
2017).
49 See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates
Practice and Application of Combination Rates in
Antidumping Investigation involving Non-Market
Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf
(Policy Bulletin 05.1).
50 Although in past investigations this deadline
was 60 days, consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a),
which states that ‘‘the Secretary may request any
person to submit factual information at any time
during a proceeding,’’ this deadline is now 30 days.
48 See,
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2017 / Notices
otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
Department’s AD questionnaire as
mandatory respondents. The
Department requires that respondents
submit a response to both the Q&V
questionnaire and the separate-rate
application by their respective
deadlines in order to receive
consideration for separate-rate status.
Use of Combination Rates
The Department will calculate
combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a
separate rate in an NME investigation.
The Separate Rates and Combination
Rates Bulletin states:
{w}hile continuing the practice of
assigning separate rates only to exporters, all
separate rates that the Department will now
assign in its NME Investigation will be
specific to those producers that supplied the
exporter during the period of investigation.
Note, however, that one rate is calculated for
the exporter and all of the producers which
supplied subject merchandise to it during the
period of investigation. This practice applies
both to mandatory respondents receiving an
individually calculated separate rate as well
as the pool of non-investigated firms
receiving the weighted-average of the
individually calculated rates. This practice is
referred to as the application of ‘‘combination
rates’’ because such rates apply to specific
combinations of exporters and one or more
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to
an exporter will apply only to merchandise
both exported by the firm in question and
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter
during the period of investigation.51
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version
of the Petition has been provided to the
Government of the PRC via ACCESS. To
the extent practicable, we will attempt
to provide a copy of the public version
of the Petition to each exporter named
in the Petition, as provided under 19
CFR 351.203(c)(2).
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 45 days after the date on which
the Petition was filed, whether there is
a reasonable indication that imports of
soil pipe fittings from the PRC are
materially injuring or threatening
material injury to a U.S. industry.52 A
negative ITC determination will result
in the investigation being terminated; 53
51 See
52 See
Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
section 733(a) of the Act.
53 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:16 Aug 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
37057
09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to
submitting factual information in this
investigation.
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) through (iv). The
regulation requires any party, when
submitting factual information, to
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. Parties are
advised to review the regulations prior
to submitting factual information in this
investigation.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.54
Parties must use the certification
formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).55 56 The Department intends
to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with
the applicable revised certification
requirements.
Extension of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of
time limits before the expiration of a
time limit established under 19 CFR
351.301, or as otherwise specified by the
Secretary. In general, an extension
request will be considered untimely if it
is filed after the expiration of the time
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301.
For submissions that are due from
multiple parties simultaneously, an
extension request will be considered
untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. 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
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-
Dated: August 2, 2017.
Carole Showers,
Executive Director, Office of Policy,
performing the duties of Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under
Administrative Protective Order (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
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate
in this investigation should ensure that
they meet the requirements of these
procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of
appearance as discussed at 19 CFR
351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i)
of the Act.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation is cast iron soil pipe fittings,
finished and unfinished, regardless of
industry or proprietary specifications, and
regardless of size. Cast iron soil pipe fittings
are nonmalleable iron castings of various
designs and sizes, including, but not limited
to, bends, tees, wyes, traps, drains, and other
common or special fittings, with or without
side inlets.
Cast iron soil pipe fittings are classified
into two major types—hubless and hub and
54 See
section 782(b) of the Act.
also Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July
17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked
questions regarding the Final Rule are available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_
info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
56 See Certification of Factual Information To
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July
17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also frequently asked
questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_
info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
55 See
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
37058
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2017 / Notices
spigot. Hubless cast iron soil pipe fittings are
manufactured without a hub, generally in
compliance with Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute
(CISPI) specification 301 and/or American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
specification A888. Hub and spigot pipe
fittings have hubs into which the spigot
(plain end) of the pipe or fitting is inserted.
Cast iron soil pipe fittings are generally
distinguished from other types of
nonmalleable cast iron fittings by the manner
in which they are connected to cast iron soil
pipe and other fittings.
The subject imports are normally classified
in subheading 7307.11.0045 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS): Cast fittings of nonmalleable
cast iron for cast iron soil pipe. The HTSUS
subheading and specifications are provided
for convenience and customs purposes only;
the written description of the scope of this
investigation is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2017–16770 Filed 8–7–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–964]
Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and
Tube From the People’s Republic of
China: Preliminary Results and Partial
Rescission of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2015–2016
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) preliminarily
determines that the five remaining
companies under review do not qualify
for a separate rate and are, therefore,
considered a part of the People’s
Republic of China (PRC)-Wide Entity for
their exports of subject merchandise
exported to the United States during the
period of review (POR), November 1,
2015, through October 31, 2016. If these
preliminary results are adopted in the
final results, the Department will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries of
subject merchandise during the POR.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
DATES: Applicable August 8, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia
Hancock or Courtney Canales, AD/CVD
Operations, Office V, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–1394 or (202) 482–4997,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:16 Aug 07, 2017
Jkt 241001
Background
On January 13, 2017, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
notice of initiation of an administrative
review of the antidumping duty (AD)
order on seamless refined copper pipe
and tube (copper pipe) from the PRC for
the period of review November 1, 2015,
through October 31, 2016.1 On January
18, 2017, Hong Kong Hailiang Metal
Trading Limited (Hong Kong Hailiang),
Shanghai Hailiang Copper Co., Ltd.
(Shanghai Hailiang), and Zhejiang
Hailiang Co., Ltd. (Zhejiang Hailiang)
(collectively, Hailiang) notified the
Department that the spelling of each
company’s name in the Initiation Notice
was incorrect.2 Accordingly, on
February 13, 2017, the Department
published in the Federal Register a
revision of the notice of initiation of the
6th administrative review of the AD
order due to a spelling error in certain
companies’ names.3 4 On February 24,
2017, Hailiang submitted a letter
indicating it would not participate in
the review.5 On March 14, 2017, the
petitioners 6 timely withdrew their
request for review with respect to 11
companies,7 but did not withdraw their
request for review for the following five
1 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR
4297 (January 13, 2017) (Initiation Notice).
2 See Letter from Hailiang, ‘‘Correct Name of
Hailiang: Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Order on Seamless Refined Copper
Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic of
China,’’ dated January 18, 2017 (Hailiang’s Correct
Name Submission).
3 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Reviews, 82 FR 10457
(February 13, 2017) (Revised Initiation Notice).
4 In the Revised Initiation Notice, the Department
initiated on Hong Kong Hailiang Metal as the
correct name identified in Hailiang’s Correct Name
Submission. However, in reviewing Hailiang’s
Correct Name Submission, the Department found
that Hong Kong Hailiang Metal Trading Limited
(Hong Kong Hailiang) was identified as the correct
spelling for Hong Kong Hailiang. See Hailiang’s
Correct Name Submission at 1.
5 See Letter from Hailiang, ‘‘Hailiang Notice of
Non-Participation in Review: Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on
Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the
People’s Republic of China,’’ dated February 24,
2017 (Hailiang Notice of Non-Participation
Submission).
6 The petitioners are the Ad Hoc Coalition for
Domestically Produced Seamless Refined Copper
Pipe and Tube; and its individual members, Cerro
Flow Products, LLC; Wieland Copper Products,
LLC; Mueller Copper Tube Products, Inc.; and
Mueller Copper Tube Company, Inc. (the
petitioners).
7 These 11 companies are: Foshan Hua Hong
Copper Tube Co., Ltd.; Golden Dragon Precise
Copper Tube Group, Inc; Golden Dragon Holding
(Hong Kong) International Co., Ltd.; Guilin Lijia
Metals Co., Ltd.; Hong Kong GD Trading Co., Ltd.;
Ningbo Jintian Copper Tube Co., Ltd.; Sinochem
Ningbo Ltd.; Sinochem Ningbo Import & Export Co.,
Ltd.; Taicang City Jinxin Copper Tube Co., Ltd.;
Zhejiang Jiahe Pipes Inc.; and Zhejiang Naile
Copper Co., Ltd.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
companies: China Hailiang Metal
Trading (China Hailiang), Shanghai
Hailiang Metal Trading Limited
(Shanghai Hailiang Trading), Hong Kong
Hailiang, Shanghai Hailiang, and
Zhejiang Hailiang.8 Accordingly, these
five companies remain under review.
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order
is seamless refined copper pipe and
tube. The product is currently classified
under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS) item
numbers 7411.10.1030 and
7411.10.1090. Products subject to this
order may also enter under HTSUS item
numbers 7407.10.1500, 7419.99.5050,
8415.90.8065, and 8415.90.8085.
Although the HTSUS numbers are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
scope of this order remains dispositive.9
Partial Rescission of Administrative
Review
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
Department will rescind an
administrative review, in whole or in
part, if the party or parties that
requested a review withdraws the
request within 90 days of the
publication date of the notice of
initiation of the requested review. As
noted above, the petitioners withdrew
their request for an administrative
review with respect to 11 companies
within 90 days of the publication date
of the notice of initiation. No other
parties requested an administrative
review of the order with respect to these
11 companies. Therefore, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
Department is rescinding this review of
the AD order on copper pipe from the
PRC with respect to these companies.
Methodology
The Department is conducting this
review in accordance with sections
751(a)(1)(B) and 751(a)(2)(A) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
For a full description of the
methodology underlying our
preliminary conclusions, see the
8 See Letter from the petitioners, ‘‘Seamless
Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from China: Partial
Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,’’
dated March 14, 2017.
9 For a full description of the scope of the Order,
see Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K.
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Seamless Refined
Copper Pipe and Tube from the People’s Republic
of China: Decision Memorandum for the
Preliminary Results of the 2015–2016 Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review,’’ dated concurrently
with, and hereby adopted by, this Federal Register
notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37053-37058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16770]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-062]
Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings From the People's Republic of China:
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigation
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable August 2, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sergio Balbontin at (202) 482-6478 or
Denisa Ursu at (202) 482-2285, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement &
Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On July 13, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
received an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of cast
iron soil pipe fittings (soil pipe fittings) from the People's Republic
of China (the PRC), filed in proper form, on behalf of the Cast Iron
Soil Pipe Institute (the petitioner).\1\ The petitioner is a trade
association, whose members are all domestic producers of soil pipe
fittings.\2\ The AD petition was accompanied by a countervailing duty
(CVD) petition for soil pipe fittings from the PRC.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Cast Iron Soil
Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic of China,'' dated July 13,
2017 (the Petition).
\2\ See Volume I of the Petition at 2. The individual members of
the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute are AB&I Foundry, Charlotte Pipe &
Foundry, and Tyler Pipe.
\3\ See Volume III of the Petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 17, 2017, the petitioner filed an amendment to Volume I of
the Petition.\4\ On July 18, 2017, the Department requested additional
information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition.\5\ The
petitioner filed responses to these requests on July 20, 2017.\6\ In
response to the Department's further requests for information and
clarification of Volume II of the Petition,\7\ the petitioner submitted
additional amendments to the Petition on July 26, 2017, and July 28,
2017.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Amendment to Petitions for
the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Cast Iron
Soil Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic of China,'' dated July
17, 2017 (Petition Amendment).
\5\ See Letters from the Department, ``Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Cast Iron Soil Pipe
Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental
Questions,'' dated July 18, 2017, and ``Petitions for the Imposition
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Cast Iron
Soil Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental
Questions,'' dated July 18, 2017.
\6\ See Letters from the petitioner ``Cast Iron Soil Pipe
Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Response to
Supplemental Questions--General Issues,'' dated July 20, 2017
(General Issues Supplement), and ``Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from
the People's Republic of China: Response to Supplemental Questions--
Antidumping Duties,'' dated July 20, 2017 (AD Supplemental Response
1).
\7\ See Memorandum to the File, ``Telephone Call Regarding
Financial Ratios,'' dated July 24, 2017; Memorandum to the File,
``Telephone Call with Petitioner's Counsel Regarding Amendments to
the Petition,'' dated July 26, 2017; and Memorandum to the File,
``Telephone Call with Petitioner's Counsel Regarding Questions for
the Normal Value Calculation,'' dated July 27, 2017.
\8\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Cast Iron Soil Pipe
Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Response to
Supplemental Questions--Antidumping Duties,'' dated July 26, 2017
(AD Supplemental Response 2); and Letter from the petitioner, ``Cast
Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Revised
Antidumping Calculation,'' dated July 28, 2017 (AD Supplemental
Response 3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of soil pipe
fittings from the PRC 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 Petition is
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner
supporting its allegations.
The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested
party as defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act. The Department also
finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with
respect to the initiation of the AD investigation that the petitioner
is requesting.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petition'' section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
Because the Petition was filed on July 13, 2017, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2017,
through June 30, 2017.
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is soil pipe fittings
from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of this
investigation, see the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the Appendix
to this notice.
Comments on Scope of the Investigation
During our review of the Petition, the Department discussed with
the petitioner the language pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure
that the scope language in the Petition would be an accurate reflection
of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking
[[Page 37054]]
relief.\10\ On July 20, 2017, the petitioner filed a revision to the
scope language.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Memorandum to the File, ``Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic
of China: Telephone Call with Petitioner, Re: Scope of the
Investigation,'' dated July 18, 2017.
\11\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Response to Supplemental
Questions--Scope,'' dated July 20, 2017 (Scope Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\12\
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). The Department will consider
all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will
consult with the interested parties prior to the issuance of the
preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual
information,\13\ all such factual information should be limited to
public information. In order to facilitate preparation of its
questionnaire, the Department requests all interested parties to submit
such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Tuesday, August 22,
2017, 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. ET on Friday, September 1, 2017, which is 10
calendar days from the deadline for initial comments.\14\ All such
comments must be filed on the record of each of the concurrent AD and
CVD investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296,
27323 (May 19, 1997).
\13\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21).
\14\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department requests that any factual information the parties
consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during
this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the
investigation may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and
request permission to submit the additional information. As stated
above, all such comments must be filed on the record of each of the
concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using Enforcement & Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing
Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\15\ 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 & Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room
18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); see
also 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 requests comments from interested parties regarding
the appropriate physical characteristics of soil pipe fittings to be
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaire. This
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics
of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant
factors and costs of production accurately as well as to develop
appropriate product-comparison criteria.
Interested parties will have the opportunity to provide any
information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development
of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may
provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as:
(1) General product characteristics; and (2) product-comparison
criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product
characteristics as product-comparison criteria. We base product-
comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among
products. In other words, although there may be some physical product
characteristics used by manufacturers to describe soil pipe fittings,
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 questionnaire, all comments must be filed
by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 17, 2017. Any rebuttal comments, which may
include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August
24, 2017. All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of the
less-than-fair-value investigation.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, 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,\16\ 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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Section 771(10) of the Act.
\17\ 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
[[Page 37055]]
which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
Petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope
of the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that soil pipe fittings, as
defined in the scope, constitute a single domestic like product, and we
have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like
product.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic of China
(Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings (Soil Pipe Fittings) from the
People's Republic of China (Attachment II). This checklist is 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 the petitioner has standing under section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data
contained in the Petition and the petitioner's subsequent submissions
with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ``Scope
of the Investigation,'' in Appendix I of this notice. The petitioner
provided the 2016 production of the domestic like product by its
members.\19\ The petitioner states that its members are the only known
producers of soil pipe fittings in the United States; therefore, the
Petition is supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Petition Amendment at 2; see also General Issues
Supplement at 1.
\20\ See Petition at 2; see also General Issues Supplement at 1
and Exhibit 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petition, Petition
Amendment, General Issues Supplement, and other information readily
available to the Department indicates that the petitioner has
established industry support for the Petition.\21\ First, the Petition
established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like
product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further
action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\22\
Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory
criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition
account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic
like product.\23\ Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met
the statutory criteria for industry support under section
732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers)
who support the Petition account for more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.\24\
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1)
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
\22\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II.
\23\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
\24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act, and it has demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigation that
it is requesting that the Department initiate.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the
petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Volume I of the Petition at 11-12; see also General
Issues Supplement at 3 and Exhibit 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; and negative impact on
profit.\27\ 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.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Volume I of the Petition at 9, 11-20, and Exhibits I-5
and I-7; see also Petition Amendment at 1-3; see also General Issues
Supplement at 3 and Exhibit 3.
\28\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Cast Iron
Soil Pipe Fittings from the People's Republic of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the AD investigation of imports of soil pipe fittings from the
PRC. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to
U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the Initiation
Checklist.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Id., at 6-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Export Price
The petitioner based the U.S. price on export price (EP) using
average unit values (AUVs) of publicly available import data.\30\ The
petitioner made deductions to U.S. price for foreign inland freight and
brokerage and handling.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See the attachment to AD Supplemental Response 3.
\31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
The petitioner stated that the Department has consistently treated
the PRC as a non-market economy (NME) country.\32\ In accordance with
section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains
in effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME
status for the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and,
therefore, remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this
investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product is appropriately
based on factors of production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market
economy country, in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Volume II of the Petition at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner argues that South Africa is an appropriate surrogate
country for the PRC because it is a market economy that is at a level
of economic development comparable to that of the PRC, it is a
significant producer of comparable merchandise, and public information
from South Africa is available to value all FOPs.\33\ Based on the
information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is
appropriate to use South Africa as a surrogate country for the PRC.
Interested parties will have the opportunity to
[[Page 37056]]
submit comments regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to
19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit
publicly available information to value FOPs no later than 30 days
before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See AD Supplemental Response 2 at 2-3 and Exhibits 2-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factors of Production
Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by
Chinese producers/exporters is not reasonably available, the petitioner
based the FOPs for materials, labor, and energy on the production
experience of one of its member companies.\34\ The petitioner asserts
that the production process for soil pipe fittings is similar
regardless of whether the product is produced in the United States or
in the PRC.\35\ The petitioner valued the estimated FOPs using
surrogate values from South Africa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Volume II of the Petition at 4 and Exhibit II-7. See
also AD Supplemental Response 2 at 1, 3, and Exhibit 1.
\35\ See AD Supplemental Response 1 at Exhibit 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Raw Materials
The petitioner valued direct materials based on publicly-available
import data for South Africa obtained from the Global Trade Atlas (GTA)
for the period November 2016 through April 2017.\36\ The petitioner
excluded all import data from countries previously determined by the
Department to maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific export
subsidies and countries previously determined by the Department to be
NME countries.\37\ In addition, in accordance with the Department's
practice, the petitioner excluded imports that were labeled as
originating from an unidentified country.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See AD Supplemental Response 2 at 3 and Exhibit 7. In the
narrative, the petitioner erroneously reported September 2016
through February 2017.
\37\ Id.
\38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Labor
The petitioner relied on 2012 data published by the International
Labor Organization, inflated to 2017 using the South African Consumer
Price Index.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Id., at Exhibit 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Energy
The petitioner valued natural gas using GTA import data.\40\ The
petitioner valued electricity using values reported in the Eskom 2016/
2017 Tariff Book.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Id., at Exhibit 7.
\41\ Id., at Exhibit 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Factory Overhead, Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses, and Profit
The petitioner calculated ratios for selling, general, and
administrative expenses, and profit based on the 2016 consolidated
financial statements of Tata Africa Steel Processors Proprietary Ltd.,
a South African steel processor and producer of aluminum wire rods.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Id., at Exhibit 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of soil pipe fittings from the PRC 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(c) of
the Act, the estimated dumping margin for soil pipe fittings from the
PRC is 92.48 percent.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See the attachment to AD Supplemental Response 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation
Based upon the examination of the AD Petition on soil pipe fittings
from the PRC, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of
section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an AD
investigation to determine whether imports of soil pipe fittings from
the PRC 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 determination no later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous
amendments to the AD and CVD laws were made.\44\ 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 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.\45\ 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 this AD investigation.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
\45\ 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).
\46\ 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
The petitioner named 22 companies in the PRC as producers/exporters
of soil pipe fittings.\47\ In accordance with our standard practice for
respondent selection in cases involving NME countries, we intend to
issue quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires to producers/exporters of
merchandise subject to this investigation and, in the event we
determine to limit the number of companies individually examined, base
respondent selection on the responses received.\48\ For this
investigation, the Department will request Q&V information from known
exporters and producers identified, with complete contact information,
in the Petition. In addition, the Department will post the Q&V
questionnaire along with filing instructions on the Enforcement &
Compliance Web site at https://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I-4.
\48\ See, e.g., Carton-Closing Staples From the People's
Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation,
82 FR 19351 (April 27, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exporters/producers of soil pipe fittings from the PRC that do not
receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the
Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement &
Compliance Web site. The Q&V response must be submitted by all PRC
exporters/producers no later than August 14, 2017. All Q&V responses
must be filed electronically via ACCESS.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation,
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\49\
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application
are outlined in detail in the application itself, which is available on
the Department's Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate application will be due 30 days after
publication of this initiation notice.\50\ Exporters and producers who
submit a separate-rate application and are selected as mandatory
respondents will be eligible for consideration for separate-rate status
only if they respond to all parts of the
[[Page 37057]]
Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. The Department
requires that respondents submit a response to both the Q&V
questionnaire and the separate-rate application by their respective
deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin
05.1).
\50\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary
may request any person to submit factual information at any time
during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Combination Rates
The Department will calculate combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin
states:
{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate
rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will
now assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those
producers that supplied the exporter during the period of
investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the
exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise
to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both
to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated
separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms
receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates.
This practice is referred to as the application of ``combination
rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations of
exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the
firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter
during the period of investigation.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been
provided to the Government of the PRC via ACCESS. To the extent
practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of
the Petition to each exporter named in the Petition, as provided under
19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of soil pipe fittings from the PRC are
materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S.
industry.\52\ A negative ITC determination will result in the
investigation being terminated; \53\ otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\53\ 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) through (iv). The regulation
requires any party, when submitting factual information, to 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. Parties are advised to review the
regulations prior to submitting factual information in this
investigation.
Extension of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. 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 https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual
information in this investigation.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\54\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).55 56 The Department intends to reject factual
submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable
revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\55\ See also Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
\56\ See Certification of Factual Information To Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
Administrative Protective Order (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 22, 2008). Parties wishing to
participate in this investigation should ensure that they meet the
requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of
appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2)
and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: August 2, 2017.
Carole Showers,
Executive Director, Office of Policy, performing the duties of Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation is cast iron soil
pipe fittings, finished and unfinished, regardless of industry or
proprietary specifications, and regardless of size. Cast iron soil
pipe fittings are nonmalleable iron castings of various designs and
sizes, including, but not limited to, bends, tees, wyes, traps,
drains, and other common or special fittings, with or without side
inlets.
Cast iron soil pipe fittings are classified into two major
types--hubless and hub and
[[Page 37058]]
spigot. Hubless cast iron soil pipe fittings are manufactured
without a hub, generally in compliance with Cast Iron Soil Pipe
Institute (CISPI) specification 301 and/or American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) specification A888. Hub and spigot pipe
fittings have hubs into which the spigot (plain end) of the pipe or
fitting is inserted. Cast iron soil pipe fittings are generally
distinguished from other types of nonmalleable cast iron fittings by
the manner in which they are connected to cast iron soil pipe and
other fittings.
The subject imports are normally classified in subheading
7307.11.0045 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS): Cast fittings of nonmalleable cast iron for cast iron soil
pipe. The HTSUS subheading and specifications are provided for
convenience and customs purposes only; the written description of
the scope of this investigation is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2017-16770 Filed 8-7-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
