Stainless Steel Flanges From India: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 40748-40750 [2018-17696]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
40748
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Notices
Comment 3: Product Characteristics used
in the CONNUM Methodology
Comment 4: Application of Partial AFA for
Packing Costs
Comment 5: Home Market Sales Viability
Comment 6: Credit Expenses
Comment 7: Clarification of the Scope of
the Order
Comment 8: Import Duties
Comment 9: G&A Expense Ratio
Calculation
Comment 10: Antidumping Duty Cash
Deposit Rate offset by the Countervailing
Duty Export Subsidy Rate
IX. Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2018–17688 Filed 8–15–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–970]
Multilayered Wood Flooring From the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With
Final Rescission of the Antidumping
Duty New Shipper Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
On July 16, 2018, the United
States Court of International Trade (CIT)
issued a final judgment in Huzhou
Muyun Wood Co., Ltd., LLC. v. United
States ordering the Department of
Commerce (Commerce) to proceed with
Huzhou Muyun Wood Co., Ltd.’s
(Muyun Wood) new shipper review of
the antidumping duty order on
multilayered wood flooring (wood
flooring) from the People’s Republic of
China (China). Commerce is notifying
the public that the final judgment in this
case is not in harmony with the final
rescission of the new shipper review.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Applicable beginning July 26,
2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Aleksandras Nakutis, Office IV,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3147.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Muyun Wood is a Chinese producer/
exporter of wood flooring. On June 13,
2015, Huzhou Muyun Wood Co., Ltd.’s
(Muyun Wood) requested a new shipper
review. On July 29, 2015, Commerce
initiated the requested new shipper
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:15 Aug 15, 2018
Jkt 244001
review covering the period of December
1, 2014, through May 31, 2015.1
On October 26, 2016, Commerce
issued the Final Rescission.2 In the
Final Rescission, Commerce determined
that Muyun’s single sale was not bona
fide and, accordingly, rescinded its new
shipper review. Muyun Wood
challenged Commerce’s findings in the
Final Rescission at the CIT.
On December 11, 2017, the CIT
remanded for Commerce to determine
whether Muyun Wood’s sale during the
review period was bona fide.3 In
accordance with the Court’s decision,
Commerce reconsidered its previous
analysis and continued to determine
that Muyun Wood’s single sale was nonbona fide. Specifically, Commerce
considered the following factors
weighed against finding Muyun’s sale
bona fide: (1) The price reported by
Muyun Wood was significantly higher
than the highest comparison sales price
for identical merchandise reported
during a contemporaneous period; (2)
the evidence indicating that Muyun
Wood’s unaffiliated and new customer
did not resell the entirety of the
merchandise at question for a profit; and
(3) the singular nature of the sale.
On July 16, 2018, the CIT held that
Commerce’s ultimate conclusion that
the sale was not bona fide was not
supported by substantial evidence and
that the rescission of the new shipper
review cannot be upheld.4 The CIT
found that the totality of the
circumstances do not support a finding
that the sale was not bona fide, given
that the sales quantity was typical, the
expenses incurred were normal, the sale
was made at arm’s length, the payment
timing was not atypical, and a
substantial majority of the product was
resold for a profit.5 The CIT entered
judgment, ordering Commerce to
proceed with Muyun Wood’s new
shipper review.
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held
that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
1 See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews; 2014–
2015, 80 FR 45192 (July 29, 2015).
2 See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the
People’s Republic of China: Rescission of
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews; 2015–
2015, 81 FR 74393 (October 26, 2016) (Final
Rescission).
3 See Huzhou Muyun Wood Co. Ltd. v. United
States, 41 CIT __, 279 F. Supp. 3d 1215 (CIT 2017).
4 See Huzhou Muyun Wood Co., Ltd. v. United
States, 2018 WL 3455350 (CIT July 16, 2018).
5 Id. at *8 (referring to the factors outlined at
section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Commerce must publish a notice of a
court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’
with Commerce’s determination and
must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision.
The CIT’s July 16, 2018 final judgment,
ordering Commerce to proceed with
Muyun Wood’s new shipper review,
constitutes a final decision of that court
that is not in harmony with the Final
Rescission.6 This notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: August 9, 2018.
James Maeder,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations performing the duties of Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2018–17562 Filed 8–15–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–533–878]
Stainless Steel Flanges From India:
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Final Affirmative
Determination of Critical
Circumstances
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) determines that
countervailable subsidies are being
provided to producers and exporters of
stainless steel flanges from India during
the period of investigation January 1,
2016, through December 31, 2016.
DATES: Applicable August 16, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ryan Mullen or Chelsey Simonovich,
AD/CVD Operations, Office V,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–5260 or
(202) 482–1979, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On January 23, 2018, Commerce
published the Preliminary
6 See MLWF Amended Final Determination, 79 FR
21509 (May 2, 2014) (MLWF Amended Final
Determination).
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Notices
Determination in the Federal Register.1
A summary of the events that occurred
since Commerce published the
Preliminary Determination, as well as a
full discussion of the issues raised by
parties for this final determination, may
be found in the accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum.2 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 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 Memorandum can be accessed
directly at https://enforcement.trade.gov.
The signed and electronic versions of
the Issues and Decision Memorandum
are identical in content.
Scope Comments
In Commerce’s Preliminary Scope
Decision Memorandum, we set aside a
period of time for parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage (i.e., scope)
in scope case briefs or other written
comments on scope issues.3 No
interested parties submitted timely
scope comments. For a complete
description of the scope of this
investigation, see Appendix I.
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this
investigation are stainless steel flanges
from India. For a complete description
of the scope of this investigation, see
‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in
Appendix I of this notice.
Analysis of Subsidy Programs and
Comments Received
The subsidy programs under
investigation, and the issues raised in
the case and rebuttal briefs filed by the
parties, are discussed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum. A list of the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
1 See
Stainless Steel Flanges from India:
Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Preliminary Affirmative and
Alignment of Final Determination With Final
Antidumping Duty Determination, 83 FR 3118
(January 23, 2018) and accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum (Preliminary
Determination).
2 See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Determination in the
Countervailing Duty Investigation of Stainless Steel
Flanges from India,’’ dated concurrently with this
determination and hereby adopted by this notice
(Issues and Decision Memorandum).
3 See Memorandum, ‘‘Scope Comments Decision
Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,’’
dated November 15, 2017 (Preliminary Scope
Decision Memorandum).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:15 Aug 15, 2018
Jkt 244001
issues parties raised and to which we
responded in the Issues and Decisions
Memorandum, is attached to this notice
at Appendix II.
Verification
Commerce conducted verification of
the questionnaire responses submitted
by the Government of India and Echjay
Forgings Private Limited (Echjay)
between June 4 and June 8, 2018.
Use of Adverse Facts Available
If necessary information is not
available on the record, or an interested
party withholds information, fails to
provide requested information in a
timely manner, significantly impedes a
proceeding by not providing
information, or information provided
cannot be verified, the Department will
apply facts available, pursuant to
section 776(a)(1) and (2) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For
purposes of this final determination,
Commerce relied, in part, on facts
available and, because certain
respondents did not cooperate by not
acting to the best of their ability to
respond to our requests for information,
we drew an adverse inference, where
appropriate, in selecting from among the
facts otherwise available.4 A full
discussion of our decision to rely on
adverse facts available is presented in
the ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise Available
and Adverse Inferences’’ section of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
Based on our analysis of the
comments received from parties and the
minor corrections presented, as well as
additional items discovered at
verification, we made certain changes to
the respondents’ subsidy rate
calculations set forth in the Preliminary
Determination. For a discussion of these
changes, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the Final Analysis
Memorandum.5
Final Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances
For the Preliminary Determination,
Commerce found that critical
circumstances exist with respect to
imports of stainless steel flanges from
Bebitz Flanges Works (Bebitz), Echjay,
and all-other exporters/producers
4 See
sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.
Issues and Decision Memorandum; see also
Memorandum, ‘‘Final Analysis Memorandum for
Echjay Forgings Pvt. Ltd,’’ dated concurrently with
this notice.
5 See
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40749
covered by the ‘‘all-others’’ rate.6 We
did not modify our critical
circumstances for the final
determination. Thus, pursuant to
section 703(e)(1) of the Act, we continue
to find that critical circumstances exist
with respect to subject merchandise
produced or exported by Bebitz, Echjay,
and ‘‘all-others.’’
Final Determination
In accordance with section
705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated
a rate for each exporter/producer of the
subject merchandise individually
investigated, i.e., Echjay and Bebitz. In
accordance with section 705(c)(5)(A) of
the Act, for companies not individually
investigated, we apply an ‘‘all-others’’
rate, which is normally calculated by
weighting the subsidy rates of the
individual companies selected as
mandatory respondents by those
companies’ exports of the subject
merchandise to the United States. Under
section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the
‘‘all-others’’ rate excludes zero and de
minimis rates calculated for the
exporters and producers individually
investigated, as well as rates based
entirely on facts otherwise available.
Where the rates for the individually
investigated companies are all zero or
de minimis, or determined entirely
using facts otherwise available, section
705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act instructs
Commerce to establish an ‘‘all-others’’
rate using ‘‘any reasonable method.’’
In this investigation, Commerce
assigned a rate based entirely on facts
available to Bebitz. Therefore, the only
rate that is not zero, de minimis or based
entirely on facts otherwise available is
the rate calculated for Echjay.
Consequently, the rate calculated for
Echjay is also assigned as the rate for
all-other producers and exporters.
The final subsidy rates are as follows:
Company
Bebitz Flanges Works Private
Limited 7 ..................................
Echjay Forgings Private Limited 8
All-Others ....................................
Subsidy
rate
(percent)
256.16
4.92
4.92
6 See Preliminary Determination, 83 FR at 3118,
3119, and accompanying Preliminary Decision
Memorandum at 4–7.
7 As discussed in the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum, Commerce has found the following
companies to be cross-owned with Bebitz Flanges
Works: Viraj Profiles Limited.
8 As discussed in the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum, Commerce has found the following
companies to be cross-owned with Echjay Forgings
Private Limited: Echjay Forging Industries Private
Limited.
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
40750
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 159 / Thursday, August 16, 2018 / Notices
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Continuation of Suspension of
Liquidation
As a result of our Preliminary
Determination and pursuant to section
703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
suspend liquidation of any entries of
merchandise under consideration from
India that were entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or
after October 25, 2017, which is 90 days
prior to the date of publication in the
Federal Register of the Preliminary
Determination. In accordance with
section 703(d) of the Act, we issued
instructions to CBP to discontinue the
suspension of liquidation for CVD
purposes for subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
on or after May 22, 2018, but to
continue the suspension of liquidation
on all entries from January 23, 2018,
through May 21, 2018.
If the U.S. International Trade
Commission (ITC) issues a final
affirmative injury determination, we
will issue a countervailing duty order
and will require a cash deposit of
estimated countervailing duties for such
entries of subject merchandise in the
amounts indicated above. If the ITC
determines that material injury, or
threat of material injury, does not exist,
this proceeding will be terminated, and
all estimated duties deposited or
securities posted as a result of the
suspension of liquidation will be
refunded or canceled.
U.S. International Trade Commission
Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of
the Act, we will notify the ITC of our
determination. In addition, we are
making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary
information relating to this
investigation. We will allow the ITC
access to all privileged and business
proprietary information in our files,
provided the ITC confirms that it will
not disclose such information, either
publicly or under an administrative
protective order (APO), without the
written consent of the Acting Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice serves as a reminder to
parties such to an APO of their
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:15 Aug 15, 2018
Jkt 244001
responsibility concerning the
disposition 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,
alternatively, conversion to judicial
protective order, is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a violation that
is subject to sanction.
Notification to Interested Parties
This determination is published
pursuant to section 705(d) and 777(i) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).
Dated: August 10, 2018.
James Maeder,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations performing the duties of Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this investigation
are certain forged stainless steel flanges,
whether unfinished, semi-finished, or
finished (certain forged stainless steel
flanges). Certain forged stainless steel flanges
are generally manufactured to, but not
limited to, the material specification of
ASTM/ASME A/SA182 or comparable
domestic or foreign specifications. Certain
forged stainless steel flanges are made in
various grades such as, but not limited to,
304, 304L, 316, and 316L (or combinations
thereof). The term ‘‘stainless steel’’ used in
this scope refers to an alloy steel containing,
by actual weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon
and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with
or without other elements. Unfinished
stainless steel flanges possess the
approximate shape of finished stainless steel
flanges and have not yet been machined to
final specification after the initial forging or
like operations. These machining processes
may include, but are not limited to, boring,
facing, spot facing, drilling, tapering,
threading, beveling, heating, or compressing.
Semi-finished stainless steel flanges are
unfinished stainless steel flanges that have
undergone some machining processes. The
scope includes six general types of flanges.
They are: (1) Weld neck, generally used in
butt-weld line connection; (2) threaded,
generally used for threaded line connections;
(3) slip-on, generally used to slide over pipe;
(4) lap joint, generally used with stub-ends/
butt-weld line connections; (5) socket weld,
generally used to fit pipe into a machine
recession; and (6) blind, generally used to
seal off a line. The sizes and descriptions of
the flanges within the scope include all
pressure classes of ASME B16.5 and range
from one-half inch to twenty-four inches
nominal pipe size. Specifically excluded
from the scope of this investigation are cast
stainless steel flanges. Cast stainless steel
flanges generally are manufactured to
specification ASTM A351.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The country of origin for certain forged
stainless steel flanges, whether unfinished,
semi-finished, or finished is the country
where the flange was forged. Subject
merchandise includes stainless steel flanges
as defined above that have been further
processed in a third country. The processing
includes, but is not limited to, boring, facing,
spot facing, drilling, tapering, threading,
beveling, heating, or compressing, and/or any
other processing that would not otherwise
remove the merchandise from the scope of
the investigation if performed in the country
of manufacture of the stainless steel flanges.
Merchandise subject to the investigation is
typically imported under headings
7307.21.1000 and 7307.21.5000 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTS). While HTS subheadings and
ASTM specifications are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope is
dispositive.
Appendix II
List of Topics Discussed in the Final
Decision Memo
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of The Investigation
IV. Final Determination of Critical
Circumstances
V. Subsidies Valuation Information
VI. Benchmarks and Interest Rates
VII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and
Adverse Inferences
VIII. Analysis of Programs
IX. Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: The Application of AFA to
Bebitz
Comment 2: SHIS Licenses Discovered at
Verification
Comment 3: Echjay’s Reporting of the
Provision of Stainless Steel, Billet, and
Bar by SAIL for LTAR
Comment 4: Whether Sufficient
Information Exists to Calculate a Subsidy
Rate for EFIPL
Comment 5: Whether AAP, DDB, EPCGS,
SHIS, and IEIS are Countervailable
Comment 6: Whether the GOI Provided
Sufficient Information for Certain
Programs
X. Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2018–17696 Filed 8–15–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–533–843]
Certain Lined Paper Products From
India: Notice of Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2016–2017
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable August 16, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cindy Robinson or Joy Zhang AD/CVD
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 159 (Thursday, August 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40748-40750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17696]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-533-878]
Stainless Steel Flanges From India: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and Final Affirmative Determination
of Critical Circumstances
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that
countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters
of stainless steel flanges from India during the period of
investigation January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016.
DATES: Applicable August 16, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Mullen or Chelsey Simonovich, AD/
CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-5260 or (202) 482-
1979, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 23, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary
[[Page 40749]]
Determination in the Federal Register.\1\ A summary of the events that
occurred since Commerce published the Preliminary Determination, as
well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this
final determination, may be found in the accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum.\2\ 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 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 Memorandum
can be accessed directly at https://enforcement.trade.gov. The signed
and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are
identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Stainless Steel Flanges from India: Preliminary
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Preliminary
Affirmative and Alignment of Final Determination With Final
Antidumping Duty Determination, 83 FR 3118 (January 23, 2018) and
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (Preliminary
Determination).
\2\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the
Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Stainless Steel Flanges from India,'' dated concurrently with this
determination and hereby adopted by this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope Comments
In Commerce's Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum, we set aside a
period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage
(i.e., scope) in scope case briefs or other written comments on scope
issues.\3\ No interested parties submitted timely scope comments. For a
complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix
I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum, ``Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the
Preliminary Determinations,'' dated November 15, 2017 (Preliminary
Scope Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are stainless steel
flanges from India. For a complete description of the scope of this
investigation, see ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in Appendix I of
this notice.
Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received
The subsidy programs under investigation, and the issues raised in
the case and rebuttal briefs filed by the parties, are discussed in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues parties raised and
to which we responded in the Issues and Decisions Memorandum, is
attached to this notice at Appendix II.
Verification
Commerce conducted verification of the questionnaire responses
submitted by the Government of India and Echjay Forgings Private
Limited (Echjay) between June 4 and June 8, 2018.
Use of Adverse Facts Available
If necessary information is not available on the record, or an
interested party withholds information, fails to provide requested
information in a timely manner, significantly impedes a proceeding by
not providing information, or information provided cannot be verified,
the Department will apply facts available, pursuant to section
776(a)(1) and (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For
purposes of this final determination, Commerce relied, in part, on
facts available and, because certain respondents did not cooperate by
not acting to the best of their ability to respond to our requests for
information, we drew an adverse inference, where appropriate, in
selecting from among the facts otherwise available.\4\ A full
discussion of our decision to rely on adverse facts available is
presented in the ``Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse
Inferences'' section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination
Based on our analysis of the comments received from parties and the
minor corrections presented, as well as additional items discovered at
verification, we made certain changes to the respondents' subsidy rate
calculations set forth in the Preliminary Determination. For a
discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum and
the Final Analysis Memorandum.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum; see also Memorandum,
``Final Analysis Memorandum for Echjay Forgings Pvt. Ltd,'' dated
concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances
For the Preliminary Determination, Commerce found that critical
circumstances exist with respect to imports of stainless steel flanges
from Bebitz Flanges Works (Bebitz), Echjay, and all-other exporters/
producers covered by the ``all-others'' rate.\6\ We did not modify our
critical circumstances for the final determination. Thus, pursuant to
section 703(e)(1) of the Act, we continue to find that critical
circumstances exist with respect to subject merchandise produced or
exported by Bebitz, Echjay, and ``all-others.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Preliminary Determination, 83 FR at 3118, 3119, and
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 4-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Determination
In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we
calculated a rate for each exporter/producer of the subject merchandise
individually investigated, i.e., Echjay and Bebitz. In accordance with
section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, for companies not individually
investigated, we apply an ``all-others'' rate, which is normally
calculated by weighting the subsidy rates of the individual companies
selected as mandatory respondents by those companies' exports of the
subject merchandise to the United States. Under section 705(c)(5)(A)(i)
of the Act, the ``all-others'' rate excludes zero and de minimis rates
calculated for the exporters and producers individually investigated,
as well as rates based entirely on facts otherwise available. Where the
rates for the individually investigated companies are all zero or de
minimis, or determined entirely using facts otherwise available,
section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act instructs Commerce to establish an
``all-others'' rate using ``any reasonable method.''
In this investigation, Commerce assigned a rate based entirely on
facts available to Bebitz. Therefore, the only rate that is not zero,
de minimis or based entirely on facts otherwise available is the rate
calculated for Echjay. Consequently, the rate calculated for Echjay is
also assigned as the rate for all-other producers and exporters.
The final subsidy rates are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ As discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum,
Commerce has found the following companies to be cross-owned with
Bebitz Flanges Works: Viraj Profiles Limited.
\8\ As discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum,
Commerce has found the following companies to be cross-owned with
Echjay Forgings Private Limited: Echjay Forging Industries Private
Limited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsidy
Company rate
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bebitz Flanges Works Private Limited \7\.................... 256.16
Echjay Forgings Private Limited \8\......................... 4.92
All-Others.................................................. 4.92
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40750]]
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations performed within five days
of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
As a result of our Preliminary Determination and pursuant to
section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of any entries of merchandise
under consideration from India that were entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after October 25, 2017, which is 90
days prior to the date of publication in the Federal Register of the
Preliminary Determination. In accordance with section 703(d) of the
Act, we issued instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of
liquidation for CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, on or after May 22, 2018, but to continue the
suspension of liquidation on all entries from January 23, 2018, through
May 21, 2018.
If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final
affirmative injury determination, we will issue a countervailing duty
order and will require a cash deposit of estimated countervailing
duties for such entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated
above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of
material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated,
and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of
the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.
U.S. International Trade Commission Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information relating to this
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or
under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written
consent of the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
This notice serves as a reminder to parties such to an 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 the return or destruction of APO materials or,
alternatively, conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO
is a violation that is subject to sanction.
Notification to Interested Parties
This determination is published pursuant to section 705(d) and
777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).
Dated: August 10, 2018.
James Maeder,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
Appendix I
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are certain forged
stainless steel flanges, whether unfinished, semi-finished, or
finished (certain forged stainless steel flanges). Certain forged
stainless steel flanges are generally manufactured to, but not
limited to, the material specification of ASTM/ASME A/SA182 or
comparable domestic or foreign specifications. Certain forged
stainless steel flanges are made in various grades such as, but not
limited to, 304, 304L, 316, and 316L (or combinations thereof). The
term ``stainless steel'' used in this scope refers to an alloy steel
containing, by actual weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5
percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements.
Unfinished stainless steel flanges possess the approximate shape of
finished stainless steel flanges and have not yet been machined to
final specification after the initial forging or like operations.
These machining processes may include, but are not limited to,
boring, facing, spot facing, drilling, tapering, threading,
beveling, heating, or compressing. Semi-finished stainless steel
flanges are unfinished stainless steel flanges that have undergone
some machining processes. The scope includes six general types of
flanges. They are: (1) Weld neck, generally used in butt-weld line
connection; (2) threaded, generally used for threaded line
connections; (3) slip-on, generally used to slide over pipe; (4) lap
joint, generally used with stub-ends/butt-weld line connections; (5)
socket weld, generally used to fit pipe into a machine recession;
and (6) blind, generally used to seal off a line. The sizes and
descriptions of the flanges within the scope include all pressure
classes of ASME B16.5 and range from one-half inch to twenty-four
inches nominal pipe size. Specifically excluded from the scope of
this investigation are cast stainless steel flanges. Cast stainless
steel flanges generally are manufactured to specification ASTM A351.
The country of origin for certain forged stainless steel
flanges, whether unfinished, semi-finished, or finished is the
country where the flange was forged. Subject merchandise includes
stainless steel flanges as defined above that have been further
processed in a third country. The processing includes, but is not
limited to, boring, facing, spot facing, drilling, tapering,
threading, beveling, heating, or compressing, and/or any other
processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the
scope of the investigation if performed in the country of
manufacture of the stainless steel flanges.
Merchandise subject to the investigation is typically imported
under headings 7307.21.1000 and 7307.21.5000 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS). While HTS subheadings
and ASTM specifications are provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive.
Appendix II
List of Topics Discussed in the Final Decision Memo
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of The Investigation
IV. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances
V. Subsidies Valuation Information
VI. Benchmarks and Interest Rates
VII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences
VIII. Analysis of Programs
IX. Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: The Application of AFA to Bebitz
Comment 2: SHIS Licenses Discovered at Verification
Comment 3: Echjay's Reporting of the Provision of Stainless
Steel, Billet, and Bar by SAIL for LTAR
Comment 4: Whether Sufficient Information Exists to Calculate a
Subsidy Rate for EFIPL
Comment 5: Whether AAP, DDB, EPCGS, SHIS, and IEIS are
Countervailable
Comment 6: Whether the GOI Provided Sufficient Information for
Certain Programs
X. Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2018-17696 Filed 8-15-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
