Forged Steel Fittings From the People's Republic of China, Italy, and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 50614-50619 [2017-23760]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50614-50619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23760]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-067, A-475-839, and A-583-863]


Forged Steel Fittings From the People's Republic of China, Italy, 
and Taiwan: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

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

DATES: Applicable October 25, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Gorelik at (202) 482-6905 or 
Robert Palmer at (202) 482-9068 (Taiwan), Katherine Johnson at (202) 
482-4929 or Renato Barreda at (202) 482-0317 (the People's Republic of 
China (PRC)), and Denisa Ursu at (202) 482-2285 or Michael Bowen at 
(202) 482-0768 (Italy), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On October 5, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the 
Department) received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports 
of forged steel fittings from the People's Republic of China (PRC), 
Italy, and Taiwan, filed in proper form, on behalf of Bonney Forge 
Corporation and United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, 
Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers 
International Union (USW) (collectively, the petitioners).\1\ The AD 
Petitions were accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) Petition 
concerning imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC. The 
petitioners are domestic producers of forged steel fittings and a 
certified union that represents workers who produce forged steel 
fittings.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce re: ``Petitions for 
the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Forged 
Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China, Italy, and 
Taiwan'' (October 5, 2017) (the Petitions).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions at 2 and 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 6 and 10, 2017, the Department requested supplemental 
information pertaining to certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ The 
petitioners filed responses to these supplemental questions on October 
11, 2017.\4\ The Department also issued second supplemental 
questionnaires with

[[Page 50615]]

regard to general issues in Volume I of the Petition and for issues 
specific to the PRC and Italy AD petitions.\5\ The petitioners filed 
their second supplemental response regarding the PRC and Italy AD 
petitions on October 17, 2017 and second supplemental response 
regarding general issues on October 18, 2017.\6\ Petitioners also filed 
a revised scope on October 19, 2017.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Letters from the Department to the petitioners re: 
``Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duties on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings from the People's 
Republic of China, Italy, and Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,'' 
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: 
Supplemental Questions,'' ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings from Taiwan: 
Supplemental Questions,''; Letter from the Department to the 
petitioners re: ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 
on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings from Italy: Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated October 10, 2017.
    \4\ See Letters from the petitioners, re: ``Forged Steel 
Fittings from the People's Republic of China, Italy, and Taiwan: 
Response to Supplemental Questions--General Issues'' (General Issues 
Supplement); ``Forged Steel Fittings from Italy: Response to 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 11, 2017 (Italy AD 
Supplemental Response); ``Forged Steel Fittings from the People's 
Republic of China: Response to Supplemental Questions,'' (PRC AD 
Supplemental Response); and ``Forged Steel Fittings from Taiwan: 
Response to Supplemental Questions,'' (Taiwan AD Supplemental 
Response), dated October 11, 2017.
    \5\ See Letter to the petitioners, re: ``Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China, Italy, 
and Taiwan: Supplemental Questions,'' dated October 17, 2017; Letter 
to the petitioners, re: Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping 
Duties on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings from the People's 
Republic of China: Second Supplement,'' dated October 16, 2017; 
Letter from the Department to the petitioners re: ``Petition for the 
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings 
from Italy: Second Supplemental Questionnaire,'' dated October 16, 
2017.
    \6\ See Letter from the petitioners re: ``Forged Steel Fittings 
from the People's Republic of China: Response to Second Supplemental 
Questions, dated October 17, 2017 (PRC AD Second Supplemental 
Response); Letter from the petitioners re: ``Forged Steel Fittings 
from Italy: Response to Second Supplemental Question,'' dated 
October 17, 2017; Letter from the petitioners to the Department, 
``Response to Second Supplemental Question on Industry Support and 
Cumulation,'' dated October 18, 2017 (Second General Issues 
Supplement).
    \7\ See Letter from the petitioners to the Department, ``Forged 
Steel Fittings from China, Italy, and Taiwan: Revised Scope,'' dated 
October 19, 2017 (Revised Scope). See also the Appendix to this 
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of forged steel 
fittings from the PRC, Italy, and Taiwan are being, or 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, the domestic industry producing 
forged steel fittings in the United States. Also, consistent with 
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by 
information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their 
allegations.
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed these Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act. The 
Department also finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD 
investigations that the petitioners are requesting.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions'' 
section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on October 5, 2017, the period of 
investigation (POI) for Taiwan and Italy is October 1, 2016, through 
September 30, 2017. Because the PRC is a non-market economy (NME) 
country, the POI for this investigation is April 1, 2017, through 
September 30, 2017.

Scope of the Investigations

    The products covered by these investigations are forged steel 
fittings from the PRC, Italy, and Taiwan. For a full description of the 
scope of these investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' 
in the Appendix to this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the 
proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would 
be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic 
industry is seeking relief.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also 
General Issues Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope).\10\ 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,\11\ 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 Tuesday, November 14, 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, November 24, 2017, which is 10 calendar days from 
the initial comments deadline.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \11\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \12\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted 
during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that 
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the 
investigations may be relevant, the party may contact the Department 
and request permission to submit the additional information. All scope 
comments must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and 
CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing 
Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\13\ An 
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the 
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in 
paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 
18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and 
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 
(November 20, 2014), for details of the Department's electronic 
filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. 
Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires

    The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to 
comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of forged steel 
fittings to be reported in response to the Department's AD 
questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key 
physical characteristics of the merchandise under consideration in 
order to report the relevant costs of production accurately as well as 
to develop appropriate product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product 
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is 
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe forged steel fittings, it may be that only a select few 
product characteristics take

[[Page 50616]]

into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In 
addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the 
physical characteristics should be used in matching products. 
Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important physical 
characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product 
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 14, 
2017. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 
24, 2017. All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of the 
PRC, Italy and Taiwan less-than-fair-value investigations.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and 
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\14\ 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.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \15\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that forged steel fittings, 
as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product and 
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China (PRC AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry 
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China, 
Italy, and Taiwan (Attachment II); Antidumping Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Forged Steel Fittings from Italy (Italy AD 
Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Forged Steel Fittings from 
Taiwan (Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These 
checklists are dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, 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 petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the Appendix of 
this notice.\17\ The petitioners provided their own production of the 
domestic like product in 2016 and compared this to the estimated total 
2016 production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry.\18\ We relied on the data the petitioners provided for 
purposes of measuring industry support.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ As noted above, the petitioners submitted a revised scope 
on October 19, 2017. See Revised Scope and the Appendix.
    \18\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 3-4 and Exhibit I-1; see 
also General Issues Supplement, at 1 and Exhibit I-15; and Second 
General Issues Supplement, at 1-2.
    \19\ Id. For further discussion, see PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; Italy AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II; and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, supplements to 
the Petitions, and other information readily available to the 
Department indicates that the petitioners have established industry 
support.\20\ First, the Petitions established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is 
not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry 
support (e.g., polling).\21\ Second, the domestic producers (or 
workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under 
section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or 
workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product.\22\ Finally, the 
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for 
more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product 
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or 
opposition to, the Petitions.\23\ Accordingly, the Department 
determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic 
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Italy AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Taiwan AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \21\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
    \22\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Italy AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Taiwan AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[[Page 50617]]

investigations that they are requesting that the Department 
initiate.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the 
petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 10 and Exhibit I-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of imports from the 
subject countries; reduced market share; underselling and price 
depression or suppression; and a negative impact on the domestic 
industry's capacity utilization, employment, and profits.\26\ 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.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id. at 10-23 and Exhibits I-4 and I-7 through I-13.
    \27\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China, 
Italy, and Taiwan (Attachment III); see also Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III; see also Taiwan AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

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

Export Price

    For the PRC and Taiwan, the petitioners based U.S. price on export 
price (EP) using an average unit value (AUV) of publicly available 
import data.\28\ For Italy, the petitioners based U.S. price on EP, 
which they calculated based on their own prices, reduced to meet the 
price obtained by a U.S. customer from an Italian producer.\29\ Where 
applicable, the petitioners made deductions from U.S. price for 
movement and other expenses, consistent with the terms of sale.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See PRC Initiation Checklist and Taiwan AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \29\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist.
    \30\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist and Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    With respect to the PRC, the petitioners stated that the Department 
has found this country to be a NME country in prior administrative 
proceedings.\31\ 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, NV in 
the PRC 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\ In the course of this investigation, all 
parties, and the public, will have the opportunity to provide relevant 
information related to the granting of separate rates to individual 
exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Volume II of the Petitions at 1-2.
    \32\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners claim that Mexico is an appropriate surrogate 
country for the PRC, because it is a market economy country 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 Mexico is available to value all material input factors.\33\ Based 
on the information provided by the petitioners, we determine that it is 
appropriate to use Mexico as a surrogate country for initiation 
purposes.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Volume II of the Petitions at 2 and Exhibits II-1 and 
II-2.
    \34\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the 
PRC producers/exporters is not available, the petitioners relied on the 
production experience of a domestic producer of forged steel fittings 
in the United States as an estimate of PRC manufacturers' FOPs.\35\ The 
petitioners valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate values from 
Mexico.\36\ Additionally, for the surrogate values denominated in 
Mexican pesos, the petitioners converted peso prices into U.S. dollars 
using the average exchange rate obtained from the Department's Web site 
for April 2017, through June 2017,\37\ and from www.exchange-rates.org 
to obtain the U.S./Mexican exchange rates for the period July 2017 
through September 2017.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Volume II of the Petitions at 4-6 and Exhibits II-7. 
See also PRC AD Supplemental Response at Exhibit II-18 and PRC AD 
Second Supplemental Response.
    \36\ See Volume II of the Petitions at Exhibits II-8 through II-
15. see also PRC AD Supplemental Response at Exhibit II-19 and PRC 
AD Second Supplemental Response.
    \37\ See Volume II of the Petitions at Exhibit II-9.
    \38\ The petitioners noted that ``the Department's exchange rate 
page {on the Department's Web site{time}  only goes through June 
2017. We have therefore used www.exchange-rates.org to obtain the 
U.S./Mexican exchange rates. . .'' See PRC AD Supplemental Response 
at 2 and Exhibits II-19 through II-22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties will have the opportunity to 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.
    For Italy, the petitioners based NV on a home market price quote 
obtained for ten selected forged steel fittings produced and sold in 
Italy within the proposed POI. The petitioners adjusted the price 
quotes for a distributor markup to obtain the ex-factory price.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Taiwan, the petitioners provided an affidavit from a foreign 
market researcher with a home market sales offer for forged steel 
fittings produced in, and sold or offered for sale in Taiwan.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC, Italy, and 
Taiwan 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 sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for 
forged steel fittings for each of the countries covered by this 
initiation are as follows: (1) PRC--142.72 percent; \41\ (2) Italy--
18.66 to 80.20 percent; \42\ and (3) Taiwan--116.17 percent.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
    \42\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist.
    \43\ See Taiwan AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions, we find that the 
Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of 
forged steel fittings from the PRC, Italy, and Taiwan are being, or are 
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. In 
accordance with

[[Page 50618]]

section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless 
postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 
140 days after the date of this initiation.
    Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD law 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 these AD investigations.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law No. 
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 petitioners named six companies in Italy and three companies in 
Taiwan, as producers/exporters of forged steel fittings.\47\ Following 
standard practice in AD investigations involving market economy 
countries, in the event the Department determines that the number of 
companies for any one market economy country is large, the Department 
intends to review U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports of forged steel fittings during the respective POI under 
the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
subheadings, and if it determines that it cannot individually examine 
each company based upon the Department's resources, then the Department 
will select respondents based on that data. We intend to release CBP 
data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with 
access to information protected by APO within five business days of the 
announcement of the initiation of these investigations. Interested 
parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance 
with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may 
be found on the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and 
respondent selection by 5:00 p.m. ET seven calendar days after the 
placement of the CBP data on the record of these investigations. 
Interested parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should submit 
those comments five calendar days after the deadline for initial 
comments.
    Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An 
electronically-filed document must be received successfully, in its 
entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the date noted above. 
If respondent selection is necessary, within 20 days of publication of 
this notice, we intend to make our decisions regarding respondent 
selection based upon comments received from interested parties and our 
analysis of the record information.
    With respect to the PRC, the petitioners named 14 producers/
exporters of forged steel fittings from the PRC.\48\ In accordance with 
our standard practice for respondent selection in AD 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 the Department determines that the 
number of companies is large, base respondent selection on the 
responses received. For this investigation, the Department will request 
Q&V information from known exporters and producers identified with 
complete contact information in the Petitions. In addition, the 
Department will post the Q&V questionnaires along with filing 
instructions on Enforcement and Compliance's Web site at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Producers/exporters of forged steel 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 of the Q&V questionnaire 
from Enforcement & Compliance's Web site. The Q&V response must be 
submitted by the relevant PRC exporters/producers no later than 5:00 
p.m. ET on November 9, 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 in 
the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which is available on the Department's Web site at http://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 have been selected as mandatory respondents will be 
eligible for consideration for separate-rate status only if they timely 
respond to all parts of the Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory 
respondents. The Department requires that companies from the PRC submit 
a response to both the Q&V questionnaire and the separate-rate 
application by the respective deadlines in order to receive 
consideration for separate-rate status. Companies not filing a timely 
Q&V response will not receive separate-rate consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 
http://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 Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of the PRC, Italy, and Taiwan via ACCESS. 
To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the 
public version of the

[[Page 50619]]

Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as provided under 19 
CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

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

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC, Italy, 
and/or Taiwan, are materially injuring, or threatening material injury 
to, a U.S. industry.\52\ A negative ITC determination for any country 
will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that 
country.\53\ Otherwise, these investigations 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)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires 
any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which 
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 
\54\ 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.\55\ Time limits for 
the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, 
which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual 
information being submitted. Interested parties should review the 
regulations prior to submitting factual information in these 
investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \55\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by 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. ET on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time 
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, we will inform parties in 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. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final 
Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 
submitting factual information in these investigations.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\56\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their 
representatives.\57\ Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions 
filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD 
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the 
formats for the revised certifications provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g). 
The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting 
party does not comply with applicable revised certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \57\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the 
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations 
should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures 
(e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 
351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) 
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    Dated: October 25, 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

Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by these investigations is carbon and 
alloy forged steel fittings, whether unfinished (commonly known as 
blanks or rough forgings) or finished. Such fittings are made in a 
variety of shapes including, but not limited to, elbows, tees, 
crosses, laterals, couplings, reducers, caps, plugs, bushings and 
unions. Forged steel fittings are covered regardless of end finish, 
whether threaded, socket-weld or other end connections.
    While these fittings are generally manufactured to 
specifications ASME B16.11, MSS SP-79, and MSS SP-83, ASTM A105, 
ASTM A350 and ASTM A182, the scope is not limited to fittings made 
to these specifications.
    The term forged is an industry term used to describe a class of 
products included in applicable standards, and does not reference an 
exclusive manufacturing process. Forged steel fittings are not 
manufactured from casting. Pursuant to the applicable standards, 
fittings may also be machined from bar stock or machined from 
seamless pipe and tube.
    All types of fittings are included in the scope regardless of 
nominal pipe size (which may or may not be expressed in inches of 
nominal pipe size), pressure rating (usually, but not necessarily 
expressed in pounds of pressure, e.g., 2,000 or 2M; 3,000 or 3M; 
6,000 or 6M; 9,000 or 9M), wall thickness, and whether or not heat 
treated.
    Excluded from this scope are all fittings entirely made of 
stainless steel. Also excluded are flanges, butt weld fittings, and 
nipples.
    Subject carbon and alloy forged steel fittings are normally 
entered under HTSUS 7307.99.1000, 7307.99.3000, 7307.99.5045, and 
7307.99.5060. They also may be entered under HTSUS 7307.92.3010, 
7307.92.3030, 7307.92.9000, and 7326.19.0010.
    The HTSUS subheadings and specifications are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the 
scope is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2017-23760 Filed 10-31-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P