Foundry Coke Products From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 41598-41599 [2017-18587]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
41598
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Notices
bond for) estimated antidumping or
countervailing duties required on those
entries at the time of entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption and to continue to collect
the cash deposit previously ordered.
For the first administrative review of
any order, there will be no assessment
of antidumping or countervailing duties
on entries of subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption during the relevant
provisional-measures ‘‘gap’’ period of
the order, if such a gap period is
applicable to the period of review.
This notice is not required by statute
but is published as a service to the
international trading community.
Dated: August 22, 2017.
James Maeder,
Senior Director perfoming the duties of
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2017–18585 Filed 8–31–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–862]
Foundry Coke Products From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of the Expedited Third Sunset
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: As a result of this sunset
review, the Department of Commerce
(the Department) finds that revocation
of the antidumping duty order on
foundry coke products (foundry coke)
from the People’s Republic of China
(PRC) would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of dumping
at the levels indicated in the ‘‘Final
Results of Review’’ section of this
notice.
DATES: Applicable September 1, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Courtney Canales, AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230; Telephone: (202) 482–4997.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Background
On July 31, 2001, the Department
published its final determination in the
less-than-fair value investigation of
foundry coke from the PRC.1 On
1 See Final Determination or Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Foundry Coke Products from the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Aug 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
September 17, 2001, the Department
published an amended final
determination of sales at less-than-fairvalue and the AD Order on foundry coke
from the PRC.2 On May 1, 2017, the
Department published the notice of
initiation of the third sunset review of
the AD Order, pursuant to section 751(c)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(Act).3 On May 10, 2017, the
Department received a notice of intent
to participate from: ABC Coke, Erie
Coke, and Tonawanda Coke
(collectively, the petitioners) within the
deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(1)(i).4 ABC Coke, Erie Coke,
and Tonawanda Coke claimed
interested party status under section
771(9)(C) of the Act, as producers in the
United States of a domestic like
product. On May 31, 2017, the
Department received a complete and
adequate substantive response from the
the petitioners within the 30-day
deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(3)(i).5 The Department
received no substantive responses from
respondent interested parties. As a
result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B)
of the Act and 19 CFR
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department
conducted an expedited sunset review
of the AD Order.
Analysis of Comments Received
A complete discussion of all issues
raised in this sunset review, including
the likelihood of continuation or
recurrence of dumping in the event of
revocation of the AD Order and the
magnitude of the margins likely to
prevail if the order were revoked, is
provided in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum, which is hereby adopted
by this notice.7 The appendix to this
notice includes a list of the issues which
the parties raised and to which the
Department responded in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum. The Issues and
Decision Memorandum is a public
document and is on file electronically
via Enforcement and Compliance’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Services System
(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
access.trade.gov and to all parties in the
Central Records Unit, room B0824 of the
main Department of Commerce
building. In addition, a complete
version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum can be accessed on the
Internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/
frn/. The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Scope of the AD Order
Final Results of Sunset Review
Pursuant to section 751(c)(1) and
752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, the
Department determines that revocation
of the AD Order would be likely to lead
to continuation or recurrence of
dumping, and that the magnitude of the
dumping margins likely to prevail
would be weighted-average dumping
margins up to 214.89 percent.
The product covered under the
antidumping duty order is coke larger
than 100 mm (4 inches) in maximum
diameter and at least 50 percent of
which is retained on a 100 mm (4 inch)
sieve, of a kind used in foundries. The
foundry coke products subject to the
antidumping duty order were
classifiable under subheading
2704.00.00.10 (as of Jan 1, 2000) and are
currently classifiable under subheading
2704.00.00.11 (as of July 1, 2000) of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS). Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and Customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of the
order is dispositive.6
People’s Republic of China, 66 FR 39487 (July 31,
2001) (LTFV Investigation Final).
2 See Notice of Amended Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping
Duty Order: Foundry Coke Products from The
People’s Republic of China, 66 FR 48025,
(September 17, 2001) (AD Order).
3 See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Review, 82
FR 20314 (May 1, 2017).
4 See Petitioners’ May 10, 2017, submission.
5 See Petitioners’ submission ‘‘Re: Foundry Coke
from China, Third Sunset Review: Substantive
Response to Notice of Initiation of Sunset Review’’
(May 31, 2017).
6 See Foundry Coke Products from the People’s
Republic of China, 77 Federal Register 34,012 (June
8, 2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305.
Timely notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials, or
conversion to judicial protective order,
7 See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, from
James Maeder, Senior Director performing the
duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
‘‘Expedited Third Sunset Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Foundry Coke
Products from the People’s Republic of China:
Issues and Decision Memorandum,’’ dated
concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Notices
is hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation which is subject to
sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these
results and notice in accordance with
sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of
the Act, 19 CFR 351.218, and 19 CFR
351.221(c)(5)(ii).
Dated: August 28, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations,
performing the non-exclusive functions and
duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. History of the Order
V. Legal Framework
VI. Discussion of the Issues
1. Likelihood of Continuation or
Recurrence of Dumping
2. Magnitude of the Margins Likely to
Prevail
VII. Final Results of Sunset Review
VIII. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2017–18587 Filed 8–31–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–122–861]
Certain Uncoated Groundwood Paper
From Canada: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable September 1, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maria Tatarska at (202) 482–1562, AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
The Petition
On August 9, 2017, the U.S.
Department of Commerce (the
Department) received an antidumping
duty (AD) Petition concerning imports
of certain uncoated groundwood paper
(UGW paper) from Canada, filed in
proper form on behalf of North Pacific
Paper Company (NORPAC, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:53 Aug 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
petitioner).1 The AD Petition was
accompanied by a countervailing duty
(CVD) Petition concerning imports of
UGW paper from Canada. The petitioner
is a domestic producer of UGW paper.2
On August 11, 2017, the Department
requested supplemental information
pertaining to certain areas of the
Petition.3 The petitioner filed responses
to these requests on August 15, 2017.4
On August 17, 2017, the Department
contacted the petitioner regarding the
proposed scope of the investigations.5
The petitioner filed revised scope
language on August 21, 2017.6 As
discussed below, on August 10, 2017,
the Department issued polling
questionnaires to all known U.S.
producers of UGW paper. The
Department received responses from all
recipients of the polling questionnaires.
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioner alleges that imports
of UGW paper from Canada are being,
or are likely to be, sold in the United
States at less than fair value (LTFV)
within the meaning of section 731 of the
Act, and that such imports are
materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, the domestic industry
producing UGW paper 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 this Petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because the
petitioner is an interested party as
1 See Letter from the petitioner ‘‘Certain Uncoated
Groundwood Paper from Canada—Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties,’’ dated August 9, 2017 (the Petition).
2 See Volume I of the Petition, at 1.
3 See Letter to the petitioner from the Department,
‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain
Uncoated Groundwood Paper from Canada:
Supplemental Questions,’’ dated August 11, 2017
(General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); see
also Letter from the Department, ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Certain Uncoated Groundwood Paper from Canada:
Supplemental Questions,’’ dated August 11, 2017
(AD Supplemental Questionnaire).
4 See ‘‘Certain Uncoated Groundwood Paper from
Canada/Responses to Supplemental Questions on
the Injury Volume of the Petition,’’ dated August
15, 2017 (General Issues Supplemental Response);
see also ‘‘Certain Uncoated Groundwood Paper
from Canada/Petitioner’s Responses to
Supplemental Questions on the Antidumping Duty
Volume of the Petition,’’ dated August 15, 2017 (AD
Supplemental Response).
5 See Memorandum, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to
the Petitioner,’’ dated August 17, 2017 (Scope
Phone Call).
6 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from
the petitioner, ‘‘Certain Uncoated Groundwood
Paper from Canada/Further revisions to the Scope
Language,’’ dated August 21, 2017 (Scope Revision
Letter).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
41599
defined in section 771(9)(C) 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.7
Period of Investigation
Because the Petition was filed on
August 9, 2017, the period of
investigation (POI) for this investigation
is July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017.
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this
investigation is UGW paper from
Canada. 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 issued questions to, and
received responses from, the petitioner
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 relief.8
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).9 The Department will consider
all comments received from interested
parties and, if necessary, will consult
with interested parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary
determinations. If scope comments
include factual information,10 all such
factual information should be limited to
public information. To facilitate
preparation of its questionnaires, the
Department requests all interested
parties to submit such comments by
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Monday,
September 18, 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
Thursday, September 28, 2017, which is
10 calendar days from the initial
comments deadline.11
The Department requests that any
factual information the parties consider
relevant to the scope of the investigation
be submitted during this time period.
7 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition’’ section, below.
8 See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire;
see also General Issues Supplemental Response,
Scope Phone Call, and Scope Revision Letter.
9 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties,
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
10 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual
information’’).
11 See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
E:\FR\FM\01SEN1.SGM
01SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 169 (Friday, September 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41598-41599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18587]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-862]
Foundry Coke Products From the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty
Order
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: As a result of this sunset review, the Department of Commerce
(the Department) finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order on
foundry coke products (foundry coke) from the People's Republic of
China (PRC) would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of
dumping at the levels indicated in the ``Final Results of Review''
section of this notice.
DATES: Applicable September 1, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney Canales, AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20230; Telephone: (202) 482-4997.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 31, 2001, the Department published its final determination
in the less-than-fair value investigation of foundry coke from the
PRC.\1\ On September 17, 2001, the Department published an amended
final determination of sales at less-than-fair-value and the AD Order
on foundry coke from the PRC.\2\ On May 1, 2017, the Department
published the notice of initiation of the third sunset review of the AD
Order, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(Act).\3\ On May 10, 2017, the Department received a notice of intent
to participate from: ABC Coke, Erie Coke, and Tonawanda Coke
(collectively, the petitioners) within the deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(1)(i).\4\ ABC Coke, Erie Coke, and Tonawanda Coke claimed
interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as
producers in the United States of a domestic like product. On May 31,
2017, the Department received a complete and adequate substantive
response from the the petitioners within the 30-day deadline specified
in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).\5\ The Department received no substantive
responses from respondent interested parties. As a result, pursuant to
section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the
Department conducted an expedited sunset review of the AD Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Determination or Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Foundry Coke Products from the People's Republic of China, 66 FR
39487 (July 31, 2001) (LTFV Investigation Final).
\2\ See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Foundry Coke Products
from The People's Republic of China, 66 FR 48025, (September 17,
2001) (AD Order).
\3\ See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Review, 82 FR 20314
(May 1, 2017).
\4\ See Petitioners' May 10, 2017, submission.
\5\ See Petitioners' submission ``Re: Foundry Coke from China,
Third Sunset Review: Substantive Response to Notice of Initiation of
Sunset Review'' (May 31, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the AD Order
The product covered under the antidumping duty order is coke larger
than 100 mm (4 inches) in maximum diameter and at least 50 percent of
which is retained on a 100 mm (4 inch) sieve, of a kind used in
foundries. The foundry coke products subject to the antidumping duty
order were classifiable under subheading 2704.00.00.10 (as of Jan 1,
2000) and are currently classifiable under subheading 2704.00.00.11 (as
of July 1, 2000) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience
and Customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the order
is dispositive.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Foundry Coke Products from the People's Republic of
China, 77 Federal Register 34,012 (June 8, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
A complete discussion of all issues raised in this sunset review,
including the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping in
the event of revocation of the AD Order and the magnitude of the
margins likely to prevail if the order were revoked, is provided in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this
notice.\7\ The appendix to this notice includes a list of the issues
which the parties raised and to which the Department responded in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a
public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and
Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic
Services System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at
https://access.trade.gov and to all parties in the Central Records Unit,
room B0824 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed
on the Internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues
and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, from James Maeder, Senior Director
performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations, ``Expedited Third Sunset Review
of the Antidumping Duty Order on Foundry Coke Products from the
People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum,'' dated
concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Sunset Review
Pursuant to section 751(c)(1) and 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, the
Department determines that revocation of the AD Order would be likely
to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, and that the
magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail would be weighted-
average dumping margins up to 214.89 percent.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely
notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or
conversion to judicial protective order,
[[Page 41599]]
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms
of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in
accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act, 19
CFR 351.218, and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(5)(ii).
Dated: August 28, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. History of the Order
V. Legal Framework
VI. Discussion of the Issues
1. Likelihood of Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping
2. Magnitude of the Margins Likely to Prevail
VII. Final Results of Sunset Review
VIII. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2017-18587 Filed 8-31-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
