| Page Range | 50623-50626 | |
| FR Document | 2017-23759 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 50623-50626] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-23759] [[Page 50623]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-068] Forged Steel Fittings From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Applicable November 1, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Smith at (202) 482-1766 or Jaron Moore at (202) 482-3640, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petition On October 5, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the Department) received a countervailing duty (CVD) Petition concerning imports of forged steel fittings from the People's Republic of China (the PRC), filed in proper form on behalf of Bonney Forge Corporation and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union (collectively, the petitioners). The CVD Petition was accompanied by antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC, Italy, and Taiwan.\1\ The petitioners consist of a domestic producer of forged steel fittings and a certified union that represents workers produce forged steel fittings.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the petitioners 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\ Id., Volume I of the Petitions, at 1 and Exhibit I-1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On October 6, 10, and 17, 2017, the Department requested supplemental information pertaining to certain areas of the Petition.\3\ The petitioners filed responses to these requests on October 11, 12 and 18, 2017, respectively.\4\ The petitioners filed revised scope language on October 19, 2017.\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ See Letter to the petitioners from the Department, ``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'' (October 6, 2017)(General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire); Letter to the petitioners from the Department, ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions'' (October 10, 2017) (PRC CVD Supplemental Questionnaire); and Letter to the petitioners from the Department, ``Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions'' (October 17, 2017) (PRC CVD Second Supplemental Questionnaire). \4\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the petitioners, ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Response to Supplemental Questions'' (October 12, 2017) (PRC CVD Supplement); see also Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the petitioners, ``Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to Supplemental Questions-- General Issues'' (October 11, 2017) (General Issues Supplement); and Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the petitioners, ``Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China, Italy, and Taiwan: Response to Second Supplemental Question on Industry Support and Cumulation'' (October 18, 2017) (Second General Issues Supplement). \5\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the petitioners, ``Forged Steel Fittings from China, Italy, and Taiwan: Revised Scope'' (October 19, 2017). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of the PRC is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC, 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 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating a CVD investigation, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their allegations. The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petition 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 CVD investigation that the petitioners are requesting.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' section below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Period of Investigation Because the Petition was filed on October 5, 2017, the period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016. Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is forged steel fittings from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the Appendix to this notice. Comments on Scope of the Investigation During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition would be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.\7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ 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).\8\ The Department will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with the interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual information,\9\ all such factual information should be limited to public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the Department requests that all interested parties 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.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual information''). \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Department requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigation may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and request permission to submit the additional information. 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).\11\ An electronically [[Page 50624]] 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Consultations Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, the Department notified representatives of the Government of the PRC of the receipt of the Petition, and provided them the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD Petition.\12\ These consultations were held via teleconference on October 20, 2017.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ See Letter to the Embassy of the People's Republic of China, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China: Invitation for Consultations to Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition'' (October 6, 2017). \13\ See Memorandum to the File, ``Consultations with Officials from the Government of China Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition Concerning Forged Steel Fittings'' (October 20, 2017). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Determination of Industry Support for the Petition Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(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 this investigation. 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 Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Forged Steel Fittings from the People's Republic of China (PRC CVD 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). The checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the Appendix of this notice. The petitioners provided their own production of the domestic like product in 2016 and compared this to the total 2016 production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.\17\ We relied on the data the petitioners provided for purposes of measuring industry support.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ See Volume I of the Petition, 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. \18\ Id. For further discussion, see PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the supplements to the Petition, and other information readily available to the Department indicates that the petitioners have established industry support.\19\ First, the Petition established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\20\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.\21\ Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.\22\ Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. \20\ See section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. \21\ See PRC CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. \22\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petition 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 CVD [[Page 50625]] investigation that they are requesting the Department initiate.\23\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Injury Test Because the PRC is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\24\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ See Volume I of the Petition, 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 country; reduced market share; underselling and price depression or suppression; and a negative impact on the domestic industry's capacity utilization, employment, and profits.\25\ 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.\26\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ Id. at 10-23 and Exhibits I-4 and I-7 through I-13. \26\ See PRC CVD 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Initiation of CVD Investigation Based on the examination of the CVD Petition, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the Government of the PRC. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation. Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous amendments to the AD and CVD laws were made.\27\ 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.\28\ The amendments to sections 776 and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this CVD investigation.\29\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). \28\ 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) (Applicability Notice). The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl. \29\ See Applicability Notice, 80 FR at 46794-95. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subsidy Allegations Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 23 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see the PRC CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation. Respondent Selection The petitioners named 14 companies as producers/exporters of forged steel fittings in the PRC.\30\ The Department intends to follow its standard practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy rates in this investigation. In the event the Department determines that the number of companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company based upon the Department's resources, where appropriate, the Department intends to select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers listed in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the Appendix. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I-3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On October 19, 2017, the Department released CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and respondent selection must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of this CVD investigation.\31\ The Department will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \31\ See Memorandum, ``Forged Steel Fittings from the PRC: U.S. Customs Data for Respondent Selection'' (October 19, 2017). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. 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. We intend to finalize our decisions regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. Distribution of Copies of the Petition In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition has been provided to the Government of the PRC via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). ITC Notification We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determination by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of forged steel fittings from the PRC are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.\32\ A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated.\33\ Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \32\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. \33\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submission of Factual Information Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; [[Page 50626]] (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 \34\ 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.\35\ 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 this investigation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \34\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b). \35\ 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.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in this investigation. Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\36\ Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials, as well as their representatives.\37\ Investigations initiated on the basis of the petition 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 the applicable revised certification requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \36\ See section 782(b) of the Act. \37\ 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 this investigation should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 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 Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation 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 alsobe 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. 2017-23759 Filed 10-31-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Dates | Applicable November 1, 2017. | |
| Contact | Brian Smith at (202) 482-1766 or Jaron Moore at (202) 482-3640, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 50623 |