Stainless Steel Bar From India: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Reinstatement of Certain Companies in the Antidumping Duty Order, 17529-17531 [2018-08290]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2018 / Notices Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise exported by the companies listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in these final results of review for each exporter as listed above; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed above that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the Chinawide entity; (4) for all non-Chinese exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese exporter that supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. 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 POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce’s presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Administrative Protective Orders This notice also 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(a)(3). 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 violation subject to sanction. These final results of review are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:44 Apr 19, 2018 Jkt 244001 Dated: April 16, 2018. 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 I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Discussion of the Issues Comment 1: Application of AFA to Chengdu Huifeng New Material Technology Co., Ltd. Comment 2: Application of AFA to the Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity Comment 3: Selection of the AFA Rate Comment 4: Selection of the Separate Rate for Non-Selected Respondents V. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2018–08289 Filed 4–19–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–810] Stainless Steel Bar From India: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Reinstatement of Certain Companies in the Antidumping Duty Order Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined that certain producers/exporters of stainless steel bar (SS Bar) from India made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV) during the period of review (POR) July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Accordingly, they are hereby reinstated in the antidumping order on SS Bar from India. DATES: Applicable April 20, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Schauer, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–0410. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On October 18, 2017, Commerce published the preliminary results of this changed circumstances review and intent to reinstate Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd. and its affiliates Precision Metals, Sieves Manufacturers (India) Pvt. Ltd., and Hindustan Inox Ltd. (collectively, the Venus Group), and PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17529 ` Viraj Profıles Ltd. (Viraj) in the antidumping duty order on SS Bar from India.1 This review covers SS Bar from India produced and/or exported by the Venus Group and Viraj. On January 9, 2018, we received case briefs from the Venus Group and Viraj.2 On January 9, 2018, we received a rebuttal brief from the petitioners.3 On March 8, 2018, Commerce held a public hearing at the request of Viraj. Commerce conducted this changed circumstances review in accordance with section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.216(d). For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.4 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 Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memo can be accessed directly at http:// enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to the order is SS bar. SS bar means articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that have been either hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or otherwise cold-finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross section along their whole length in the shape of circles, segments of circles, ovals, rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons, octagons, or other convex polygons. SS bar includes cold-finished 1 See Stainless Steel Bar from India: Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Intent To Reinstate Certain Companies in the Antidumping Duty Order, 82 FR 48483, October 18, 2017 (CCR Preliminary Results). 2 See Letter from the Venus Group, ‘‘Stainless Steel Bar from India: Administrative Case Brief of Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd.,’’ dated January 9, 2018, and Letter from Viraj, ‘‘Stainless Steel Bar from India: Case Brief,’’ dated January 9, 2018. 3 See Letters from the petitioners, ‘‘Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief Regarding Venus,’’ dated January 19, 2018, and ‘‘Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief Regarding Viraj,’’ dated January 19, 2018. The petitioners are Carpenter Technology Corporation, Crucible Industries LLC, Electralloy, a Division of G.O. Carlson, Inc., North-American Stainless, Outokumpu Stainless Bar, LLC, Universal Stainless & Alloy Products, Inc., and Valbruna Slater Stainless, Inc. 4 See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review of Stainless Steel Bar from India,’’ dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). E:\FR\FM\20APN1.SGM 20APN1 17530 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2018 / Notices SS bars that are turned or ground in straight lengths, whether produced from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs, grooves, or other deformations produced during the rolling process. Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless steel semifinished products, cut-to-length flatrolled products (i.e., cut-to-length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness have a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm or more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness), wire (i.e., cold-formed products in coils, of any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, which do not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and angles, shapes, and sections. Imports of these products are currently classifiable under subheadings 7222.10.00, 7222.11.00, 7222.19.00, 7222.20.00, 7222.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS). Although the HTS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Basis for Reinstatement sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES In requesting revocation, pursuant to 19 CFR 353.25(b) (1996) and 19 CFR 353.25(a)(2)(iii) (1996),5 both the Venus Group and Viraj agreed to immediate reinstatement of the order, so long as any exporter or producer is subject to the order, if the Secretary concludes that subsequent to the revocation, the Venus Group and/or Viraj sold SS Bar in the United States at less than NV.6 Under 19 CFR 353.25(a)(2)(iii) (1996), as long as any exporter or producer is subject to an antidumping duty order which remains in force, an entity previously granted a revocation may be reinstated under that order if it is established that the entity 5 The regulation that was in effect when the Venus Group and Viraj requested revocation was amended in 1997 to become 19 CFR 351.222(b). This regulation was then revoked in 2012. See Modification to Regulation Concerning the Revocation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR 29875 (May 21, 2012). However, when revoking this regulation, Commerce noted that ‘‘{a}ny company that has been revoked from an antidumping . . . order will remain subject to its certified agreement to be reinstated with respect to that order if Commerce finds it to have resumed dumping. . . .’’ See id. at 29882. 6 See Stainless Steel Bar from India; Final Results, Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and Determination To Revoke in Part, 69 FR 55409 (September 14, 2004) (Viraj Revocation) and Stainless Steel Bar from India: Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, and Revocation of the Order, in Part, 76 FR 56401 (September 13, 2011) (Venus Revocation). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:44 Apr 19, 2018 Jkt 244001 has resumed the dumping of subject merchandise. In this case, because other exporters in India remain subject to the SS Bar order, the order remains in effect, and the Venus Group and/or Viraj may be reinstated in the order. Commerce conditionally granted the Venus Group and Viraj revocation based, in part, upon their agreement to immediate reinstatement in the antidumping duty order if Commerce were to find that the companies resumed dumping of SS Bar from India.7 As discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, we continue to find that the use of facts available is warranted in determining the dumping margin of the Venus Group and Viraj pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act. Further, we continue to find that the Venus Group and Viraj failed to cooperate to the best of their ability and, therefore, the use of facts available with an adverse inference is appropriate (AFA), pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. We have assigned, as AFA, the rates below to the Venus Group and Viraj. Accordingly, we are reinstating the Venus Group and Viraj in the antidumping duty order on SS Bar from India. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this changed circumstances review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues which parties raised and to which we respond in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an Appendix. Final Results of Review Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016: Producer/exporter Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd. and its affiliates Precision Metals, Sieves Manufacturers (India) Pvt. Ltd., and Hindustan Inox Ltd ........................... Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) 30.92 7 See Viraj Revocation, 69 FR at 55411 (‘‘Viraj provided each of the certifications required under 19 CFR 351.222(e) . . . {including} an agreement to immediate reinstatement of the order if the Department concludes that the company, subsequent to the revocation, sold subject merchandise at less than NV.’’) and Venus Revocation, 76 at 56402–3 (‘‘the company has agreed to immediate reinstatement of the order if we find that it has resumed making sales at less than fair value’’). PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Producer/exporter ` Viraj Profıles Ltd 8 ....................... Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) 30.92 Disclosure Normally, the Department discloses to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with the final results of changed circumstances review within five days after public announcement of the final results of changed circumstances review in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Because Commerce used an adverse inference in selecting from among the facts otherwise available to each of the respondents in this changed circumstances review, in accordance with section 776 of the Act, there are no calculations to disclose. Cash Deposit Requirements Because we established that SS bar from India produced and/or exported by the Venus Group and Viraj are being sold at less than NV, the Venus Group and Viraj are hereby reinstated in the antidumping duty order on SS Bar from India effective upon the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. We will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries at 30.92 percent and to continue to require a cash deposit at the current rate for all shipments of the subject merchandise of SS Bar produced and/or exported by either the Venus Group and Viraj and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after October 18, 2017, the date of publication of the preliminary results in the Federal Register. These instructions shall remain in effect until further notice. Notifications to Interested Parties This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. 8 Viraj Alloys, Ltd., Viraj Forgings, Ltd., and Viraj Impoexpo, Ltd., are collectively now known as Viraj Profiles Limited. In July 2006, Viraj Forgings Ltd. merged with Viraj Alloys Ltd.; in April 2007, Viraj Alloys and Viraj Impoexpo Ltd. merged into Viraj Profiles Ltd. E:\FR\FM\20APN1.SGM 20APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2018 / Notices We are issuing and publishing these results of review in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216. Dated: April 16, 2018. 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 1. Summary 2. Background 3. Scope of the Order 4. Discussion of the Issues a. Whether Adverse Facts Available Is Warranted for the Venus Group b. Whether Adverse Facts Available Is Warranted for Viraj 5. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2018–08290 Filed 4–19–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Minority Business Development Agency Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; National Minority Business Awards Minority Business Development Agency, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before April 27, 2018. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the internet at PRAcomments@doc.gov). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Antavia Grimsley, Management Analyst, Minority Business Development Agency, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 5063, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone (202) 482–7458, and email: agrimsley@mbda.gov. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:44 Apr 19, 2018 Jkt 244001 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract The Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) is the only federal agency created exclusively to foster the growth and global competitiveness of minority-owned businesses in the United States. For this purpose, a minority owned business must be owned or controlled by one of the following persons or group of persons: African American, American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, Asian Indian, and Hasidic Jew. MBDA provides management and technical assistance to large, medium, and small minority business enterprises through a network of business centers throughout the United States. Since 1983, every president has issued a Presidential Proclamation designating one week as National Minority Enterprise Development (MED) Week. MBDA recognizes the role that minority entrepreneurs play in building the Nation’s economy by honoring businesses that are making a significant contribution through the creation of jobs, products and services, in addition to supporting their local communities. The National Minority Business Awards Program is a key element of MED Week and celebrates the outstanding achievements of minority entrepreneurs. MBDA may make awards in the following categories: Minority Construction Firm of the Year, Minority Export Firm of the Year, Minority Manufacturing Firm of the Year, Minority Health Products and Services Firm of the Year, Minority Innovative Technology Firm of the Year, Minority Marketing and Communications Firm of the Year, Minority Professional Services Firm of the Year, Minority VeteranOwned Firm of the Year, Minority ‘‘Under 30’’ Firm of the Year, and MBDA Minority Business Enterprise of the Year. In addition, MBDA may recognize trailblazers and champions through the Access to Capital Award, Advocate of the Year Award, Distinguished Supplier Diversity Award, Abe Venable Legacy Award for Lifetime Achievement, and Ronald H. Brown Leadership Awards. All awards will be presented at a ceremony during National MED Week. Nominations for these awards are open to the public. MBDA must collect two types of information: (a) Information identifying the nominee and nominator, and (b) information explaining why the nominee should be given the award. The information will be used to determine those applicants best meeting the preannounced evaluation criterion. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 17531 Use of a nomination form standardizes and limits the information collected as part of the nomination process. This makes the competition fair and eases the burden on applicants and reviewers. Participation in the National Minority Business Awards competition is voluntary and the awards are strictly honorary. II. Method of Collection The form may be submitted electronically or paper format. III. Data OMB Control Number: 0640–0025. Form Number(s): Not applicable. Type of Review: Regular submission. Affected Public: Businesses or other for profit organizations, not-for-profit institutions, State, Local, or Tribal government, and Federal government. Estimated Number of Respondents: 100. Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 200. Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Sheleen Dumas, Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. 2018–08270 Filed 4–19–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–21–P E:\FR\FM\20APN1.SGM 20APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 77 (Friday, April 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17529-17531]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08290]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-810]


Stainless Steel Bar From India: Final Results of Changed 
Circumstances Review and Reinstatement of Certain Companies in the 
Antidumping Duty Order

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined that 
certain producers/exporters of stainless steel bar (SS Bar) from India 
made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV) during 
the period of review (POR) July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. 
Accordingly, they are hereby reinstated in the antidumping order on SS 
Bar from India.

DATES: Applicable April 20, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Schauer, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0410.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On October 18, 2017, Commerce published the preliminary results of 
this changed circumstances review and intent to reinstate Venus Wire 
Industries Pvt. Ltd. and its affiliates Precision Metals, Sieves 
Manufacturers (India) Pvt. Ltd., and Hindustan Inox Ltd. (collectively, 
the Venus Group), and Viraj Prof[igrave]les Ltd. (Viraj) in the 
antidumping duty order on SS Bar from India.\1\ This review covers SS 
Bar from India produced and/or exported by the Venus Group and Viraj.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Stainless Steel Bar from India: Preliminary Results of 
Changed Circumstances Review and Intent To Reinstate Certain 
Companies in the Antidumping Duty Order, 82 FR 48483, October 18, 
2017 (CCR Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 9, 2018, we received case briefs from the Venus Group 
and Viraj.\2\ On January 9, 2018, we received a rebuttal brief from the 
petitioners.\3\ On March 8, 2018, Commerce held a public hearing at the 
request of Viraj.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Letter from the Venus Group, ``Stainless Steel Bar from 
India: Administrative Case Brief of Venus Wire Industries Pvt. 
Ltd.,'' dated January 9, 2018, and Letter from Viraj, ``Stainless 
Steel Bar from India: Case Brief,'' dated January 9, 2018.
    \3\ See Letters from the petitioners, ``Petitioners' Rebuttal 
Brief Regarding Venus,'' dated January 19, 2018, and ``Petitioners' 
Rebuttal Brief Regarding Viraj,'' dated January 19, 2018. The 
petitioners are Carpenter Technology Corporation, Crucible 
Industries LLC, Electralloy, a Division of G.O. Carlson, Inc., 
North-American Stainless, Outokumpu Stainless Bar, LLC, Universal 
Stainless & Alloy Products, Inc., and Valbruna Slater Stainless, 
Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce conducted this changed circumstances review in accordance 
with section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) 
and 19 CFR 351.216(d). For a full description of the methodology 
underlying our conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\4\ 
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 Service System (ACCESS). 
ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, 
and it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 
B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a 
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memo can be accessed 
directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review of Stainless Steel Bar 
from India,'' dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this 
notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the order is SS bar. SS bar means 
articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that have been either 
hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or otherwise cold-
finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross section along their 
whole length in the shape of circles, segments of circles, ovals, 
rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons, octagons, or other 
convex polygons. SS bar includes cold-finished

[[Page 17530]]

SS bars that are turned or ground in straight lengths, whether produced 
from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and cut rod or wire, and 
reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs, grooves, or other 
deformations produced during the rolling process.
    Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless 
steel semi-finished products, cut-to-length flat-rolled products (i.e., 
cut-to-length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness 
have a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm 
or more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures 
at least twice the thickness), wire (i.e., cold-formed products in 
coils, of any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, 
which do not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and 
angles, shapes, and sections.
    Imports of these products are currently classifiable under 
subheadings 7222.10.00, 7222.11.00, 7222.19.00, 7222.20.00, 7222.30.00 
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS). Although the HTS subheadings 
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written 
description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

Basis for Reinstatement

    In requesting revocation, pursuant to 19 CFR 353.25(b) (1996) and 
19 CFR 353.25(a)(2)(iii) (1996),\5\ both the Venus Group and Viraj 
agreed to immediate reinstatement of the order, so long as any exporter 
or producer is subject to the order, if the Secretary concludes that 
subsequent to the revocation, the Venus Group and/or Viraj sold SS Bar 
in the United States at less than NV.\6\ Under 19 CFR 353.25(a)(2)(iii) 
(1996), as long as any exporter or producer is subject to an 
antidumping duty order which remains in force, an entity previously 
granted a revocation may be reinstated under that order if it is 
established that the entity has resumed the dumping of subject 
merchandise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The regulation that was in effect when the Venus Group and 
Viraj requested revocation was amended in 1997 to become 19 CFR 
351.222(b). This regulation was then revoked in 2012. See 
Modification to Regulation Concerning the Revocation of Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR 29875 (May 21, 2012). However, 
when revoking this regulation, Commerce noted that ``{a{time} ny 
company that has been revoked from an antidumping . . . order will 
remain subject to its certified agreement to be reinstated with 
respect to that order if Commerce finds it to have resumed dumping. 
. . .'' See id. at 29882.
    \6\ See Stainless Steel Bar from India; Final Results, 
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and 
Determination To Revoke in Part, 69 FR 55409 (September 14, 2004) 
(Viraj Revocation) and Stainless Steel Bar from India: Final Results 
of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, and Revocation of the 
Order, in Part, 76 FR 56401 (September 13, 2011) (Venus Revocation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this case, because other exporters in India remain subject to 
the SS Bar order, the order remains in effect, and the Venus Group and/
or Viraj may be reinstated in the order. Commerce conditionally granted 
the Venus Group and Viraj revocation based, in part, upon their 
agreement to immediate reinstatement in the antidumping duty order if 
Commerce were to find that the companies resumed dumping of SS Bar from 
India.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Viraj Revocation, 69 FR at 55411 (``Viraj provided each 
of the certifications required under 19 CFR 351.222(e) . . . 
{including{time}  an agreement to immediate reinstatement of the 
order if the Department concludes that the company, subsequent to 
the revocation, sold subject merchandise at less than NV.'') and 
Venus Revocation, 76 at 56402-3 (``the company has agreed to 
immediate reinstatement of the order if we find that it has resumed 
making sales at less than fair value'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, we continue to 
find that the use of facts available is warranted in determining the 
dumping margin of the Venus Group and Viraj pursuant to section 776(a) 
of the Act. Further, we continue to find that the Venus Group and Viraj 
failed to cooperate to the best of their ability and, therefore, the 
use of facts available with an adverse inference is appropriate (AFA), 
pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. We have assigned, as AFA, the 
rates below to the Venus Group and Viraj. Accordingly, we are 
reinstating the Venus Group and Viraj in the antidumping duty order on 
SS Bar from India.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this changed circumstances review are addressed in the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues which parties raised and to 
which we respond in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to 
this notice as an Appendix.

Final Results of Review

    Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping 
margins exist for the period July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted-
                                                                average
                      Producer/exporter                         dumping
                                                                margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Venus Wire Industries Pvt. Ltd. and its affiliates Precision       30.92
 Metals, Sieves Manufacturers (India) Pvt. Ltd., and
 Hindustan Inox Ltd.........................................
Viraj Prof[igrave]les Ltd \8\...............................       30.92
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    Normally, the Department discloses to interested parties the 
calculations performed in connection with the final results of changed 
circumstances review within five days after public announcement of the 
final results of changed circumstances review in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b). Because Commerce used an adverse inference in selecting 
from among the facts otherwise available to each of the respondents in 
this changed circumstances review, in accordance with section 776 of 
the Act, there are no calculations to disclose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Viraj Alloys, Ltd., Viraj Forgings, Ltd., and Viraj 
Impoexpo, Ltd., are collectively now known as Viraj Profiles 
Limited. In July 2006, Viraj Forgings Ltd. merged with Viraj Alloys 
Ltd.; in April 2007, Viraj Alloys and Viraj Impoexpo Ltd. merged 
into Viraj Profiles Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Because we established that SS bar from India produced and/or 
exported by the Venus Group and Viraj are being sold at less than NV, 
the Venus Group and Viraj are hereby reinstated in the antidumping duty 
order on SS Bar from India effective upon the publication of this 
notice in the Federal Register. We will instruct U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all 
entries at 30.92 percent and to continue to require a cash deposit at 
the current rate for all shipments of the subject merchandise of SS Bar 
produced and/or exported by either the Venus Group and Viraj and 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after 
October 18, 2017, the date of publication of the preliminary results in 
the Federal Register. These instructions shall remain in effect until 
further notice.

Notifications to Interested Parties

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion 
to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply 
with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.

[[Page 17531]]

    We are issuing and publishing these results of review in accordance 
with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216.

    Dated: April 16, 2018.
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

1. Summary
2. Background
3. Scope of the Order
4. Discussion of the Issues
    a. Whether Adverse Facts Available Is Warranted for the Venus 
Group
    b. Whether Adverse Facts Available Is Warranted for Viraj
5. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2018-08290 Filed 4-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P