83 FR 8053 - Cast Iron Soil Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigation
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 37 (February 23, 2018)
International Trade Administration
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 37 (February 23, 2018)
| Page Range | 8053-8058 | |
| FR Document | 2018-03751 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 37 (Friday, February 23, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 8053-8058] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-03751] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-079] Cast Iron Soil Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigation AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Applicable February 15, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Javier Barrientos at (202) 482-2243, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petition On January 26, 2018, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) received an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of cast iron soil pipe (soil pipe) from the People's Republic of China (China), filed in proper form, on behalf of the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute (the petitioner).\1\ The petitioner is a trade association, whose members are all domestic producers of soil pipe.\2\ The AD petition was accompanied by a countervailing duty (CVD) petition for soil pipe from China.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the petitioner re: Cast Iron Pipe from the People's Republic of China--Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties, dated January 26, 2018 (Petition). \2\ See Volume I of the Petition at 2. The individual members of the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute are AB&I Foundry, Charlotte Pipe & Foundry, and Tyler Pipe. \3\ See Volume III of the Petition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On January 31, 2018, Commerce requested additional information and clarification of certain areas of the Petition.\4\ The petitioner filed responses to these requests on February 2, 2018.\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ See Letters from Commerce, ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions,'' dated January 31, 2018, and ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People's Republic of China: General Issues Supplemental Questions,'' dated January 31, 2018. \5\ See Letters from the petitioner, ``Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Response to Supplemental Questions-- General Issues,'' dated February 2, 2018 (General Issues Supplement), and ``Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Response to Supplemental Questions--Antidumping Duties,'' dated February 2, 2018 (AD Supplemental Response). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of soil pipe from China are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that, such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations. Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD investigation that the petitioner is requesting.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' section, below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Period of Investigation Because the Petition was filed on January 26, 2018, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017. Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is soil pipe from China. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the Appendix to this notice. Comments on the Scope of the Investigation On February 2, 2018, in response to a question from Commerce, the petitioner filed a revision to the scope language.\7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ See General Issues Supplement at Exhibit 1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 8054]] As discussed in the preamble to Commerce's regulations,\8\ we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope). Commerce 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. In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaire, Commerce requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Wednesday, March 7, 2018, 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 Monday, March 19, 2018, which is the next business day after the tenth calendar day from the deadline for initial comments.\10\ All such comments must be filed on the record of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties: Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21). \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commerce 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 Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. As stated above, all such comments must be filed on the record of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. Filing Requirements All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement & Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ An electronically- filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents excepted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement & 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 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements); see also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011), for details of Commerce's electronic filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires Commerce requests comments from interested parties regarding the appropriate physical characteristics of soil pipe to be reported in response to Commerce's AD questionnaire. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant factors and costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate product- comparison criteria. Interested parties will have the opportunity to provide any information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product characteristics; and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-comparison criteria. We base product- comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, although there may be some physical product characteristics used by manufacturers to describe soil pipe, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take into account commercially-meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics last. In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaire, all comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 7, 2018. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 19, 2018. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of the less-than-fair value investigation. Determination of Industry Support for the Petition Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce 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 Commerce 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 Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,\12\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce'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.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ See Section 771(10) of the Act. \13\ 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 a petition). With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not offer a definition of the domestic like product [[Page 8055]] distinct from the scope of the Petition. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that soil pipe, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\14\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People's Republic of China (Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People's Republic of China (Attachment II). This 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 petitioner has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petition and the General Issues Supplement with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the Appendix to this notice. The petitioner provided the 2017 production of the domestic like product by its members.\15\ The petitioner states that its members are the only known producers of soil pipe in the United States; therefore, the Petition is supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.\16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ See Volume I of the Petition at 4. \16\ Id. at 3-4 and Exhibit I-1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petition.\17\ 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, Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\18\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.\19\ Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the 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.\20\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. \18\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. \19\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. \20\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act, and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigation that it is requesting that Commerce initiate.\21\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\22\ The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; reduced market share and increasing market share of subject imports; underselling and price depression; lost sales and revenues; and negative impact on financial results, including total revenue, gross profits, operating income, and net income.\23\ 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.\24\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ See Volume I of the Petition at 13-14 and Exhibit I-7. \23\ See Volume I of the Petition at 14-19 and Exhibits I-7, I-9 and I-10; see also General Issues Supplement at 1. \24\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People's Republic of China. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Allegations of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less- than-fair value upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate the AD investigation of imports of soil pipe from China. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the Initiation Checklist.\25\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ Id. at 6-9. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Export Price The petitioner based the U.S. price on export price (EP) using average unit values (AUVs) of publicly available import data.\26\ The petitioner made deductions to U.S. price for foreign inland freight and brokerage and handling.\27\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ See Volume II of the Petition at 3 and Exhibit II-4. \27\ Id. at 3-4 and Exhibits II-5 and 6; see also AD Supplemental Response at 4-6 and Exhibits 4-6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Normal Value Commerce considers China to be a non-market economy (NME) country.\28\ In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains in effect until revoked by Commerce. The presumption of NME status for China has not been revoked by Commerce and, therefore, remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product is appropriately based on factors of production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market economy country, in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ See Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Aluminum Foil from the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair-Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 82 FR 50858, 50871 (November 2, 2017), and accompanying decision memorandum, China's Status as a Non-Market Economy; see also Volume II of the Petition at 1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The petitioner argues that Brazil is an appropriate surrogate country for China because it is a market economy that is at a level of economic development comparable to that of China, it is a significant producer of comparable merchandise, and public information from Brazil is available to value all FOPs.\29\ Based on the information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is appropriate to use Brazil as a surrogate country for China. Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly available information to value FOPs no later than 30 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ See Volume II of the Petition at 2-3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Factors of Production Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by Chinese producers/exporters is not reasonably available, the petitioner based the FOPs for materials, labor, and energy on the [[Page 8056]] production experience of one of its member companies.\30\ The petitioner maintains that the production process for soil pipe is similar regardless of whether the product is produced in the United States or in China.\31\ The petitioner valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate values from Brazil. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ Id. at 5-6 and Exhibit II-7. See also AD Supplemental Response at 3 and Exhibit 2. \31\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valuation of Raw Materials The petitioner valued direct materials based on publicly-available import data for Brazil obtained from the Global Trade Atlas (GTA) for the period July 2017 through December 2017.\32\ The petitioner excluded all import data from countries previously determined by Commerce to maintain export subsidies and countries previously determined by Commerce to be NME countries.\33\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \32\ See Volume II of the Petition at 5-6 and Exhibit II-9. \33\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valuation of Labor The petitioner relied on June through November 2017 data published by the Instituto Brasilero de Geografia e Estatistica for wage rates in manufacturing.\34\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \34\ Id. at 7 and Exhibit II-12. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valuation of Energy The petitioner valued natural gas and coke using GTA import data.\35\ The petitioner valued electricity using POI values reported in Brazil's Ministry of Mines and Energy Monthly Energy Bulletin.\36\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \35\ Id. at 7 and Exhibit II-9. \36\ Id. at 7 and Exhibit II-11. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valuation of Factory Overhead, Selling, General and Administrative Expenses, and Profit The petitioner calculated ratios for overhead, selling, general, and administrative expenses, and profit based on the 2015 consolidated financial statements of Tupy SA, a cast iron products producer in Brazil.\37\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \37\ Id. at 7-8 and Exhibit II-13. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fair Value Comparisons Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to believe that imports of soil pipe from China are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair value. Based on comparisons of EP to NV, in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, the estimated dumping margin for soil pipe from China is 93.32 percent.\38\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \38\ See AD Supplemental Response at 7 and Exhibit 6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Initiation of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigation Based upon the examination of the AD Petition on soil pipe from China, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an AD investigation to determine whether imports of soil pipe from China are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation. Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous amendments to the AD and CVD laws were made.\39\ The 2015 law does not specify dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, Commerce 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.\40\ The amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to this AD investigation.\41\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \39\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). \40\ 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). \41\ Id. at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Respondent Selection The petitioner named numerous companies as producers/exporters of soil pipe from China.\42\ In accordance with our standard practice for respondent selection in cases involving NME countries, we intend to issue quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires to producers/exporters of merchandise subject to this investigation. In the event Commerce determines that the number of companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on the responses received.\43\ For this investigation, Commerce will request Q&V information from known exporters and producers identified, with complete contact information, in the Petition. In addition, Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaire along with filing instructions on the Enforcement & Compliance website at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \42\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I-6. \43\ See, e.g., Carton-Closing Staples from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation, 82 FR 19351 (April 27, 2017). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Exporters/producers of soil pipe from China that do not receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement & Compliance website. The Q&V response must be submitted by all Chinese exporters/ producers no later than February 26, 2018. All Q&V responses must be filed electronically via ACCESS. Separate Rates In order to obtain separate rate status in an NME investigation, exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\44\ The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application are outlined in detail in the application itself, which is available on Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation notice.\45\ Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate application and are selected as mandatory respondents will be eligible for consideration for separate-rate status only if they respond to all parts of Commerce's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. Commerce requires that respondents submit a response to both the Q&V questionnaire and the separate-rate application by their respective deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \44\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 05.1). \45\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days, consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary may request any person to submit factual information at any time during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Use of Combination Rates Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states: {w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the [[Page 8057]] period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted- average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of ``combination rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.\46\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \46\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Distribution of Copies of the Petition In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petition has been provided to the Government of China (GOC) via ACCESS. Because of the large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition,\47\ Commerce considers the service of the public version of the Petition to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by delivery of the public version to the GOC, consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \47\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I-4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ITC Notification We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(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 soil pipe from China are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.\48\ A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated; \49\ otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \48\ See section 733(a) of the Act. \49\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submission of Factual Information Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i) through (iv). The regulation requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 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. 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. Parties are advised to review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in this investigation. Extension 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. 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. 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.\50\ Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g).\51\ \52\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable revised certification requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \50\ See section 782(b) of the Act. \51\ See also Certification of Factual Information To Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. \52\ 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 Administrative Protective Order (APO) in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce 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 732(c)(2) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: February 15, 2018. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix--Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is cast iron soil pipe, whether finished or unfinished, regardless of industry or proprietary specifications, and regardless of wall thickness, length, diameter, surface finish, end finish, or stenciling. The scope of this investigation includes, but is not limited to, both hubless and hub and spigot cast iron soil pipe. Cast iron soil pipe is nonmalleable iron pipe of various designs and sizes. Cast iron soil pipe is generally distinguished from other types of nonmalleable cast iron pipe by the manner in which it is connected to cast iron soil pipe fittings. Cast iron soil pipe is classified into two major types--hubless and hub and spigot. Hubless cast iron soil pipe is manufactured without a hub, generally in compliance with Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute (CISPI) specification 301 and/or American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specification A888, including any revisions to those specifications. Hub and spigot pipe has one or more hubs into which the spigot (plain end) of a fitting is inserted. All pipe meeting the physical description set forth above is covered by the scope of this investigation, whether or not produced according to a particular standard. The subject imports are currently classified in subheading 7303.00.0030 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS): Cast iron soil pipe. The HTSUS subheading and specifications are provided for convenience and customs [[Page 8058]] purposes only; the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2018-03751 Filed 2-22-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Notices 8053
Federal Register on June 26, 2017 (82 SunnyGem, LLC, Wasco, CA Petition.4 The petitioner filed responses
FR 28826). Western Nut Company, Chico, CA to these requests on February 2, 2018.5
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wonderful Pistachios & Almonds, LLC, In accordance with section 732(b) of
Joseph Flynn, Director, Office of Trade Los Angeles, CA the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
and Economic Analysis, International Act), the petitioner alleges that imports
The effective date of the amended
Trade Administration, (202) 482–5131 of soil pipe from China are being, or are
certificate is November 14, 2017, the
(this is not a toll-free number) or email likely to be, sold in the United States at
date on which CAEA’s application to
at etca@trade.gov. less-than-fair value within the meaning
amend was deemed submitted.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of of section 731 of the Act, and that, such
the Export Trading Company Act of Dated: February 20, 2018.
imports are materially injuring, or
1982 (15 U.S.C. Sections 4001–21) (the Joseph E. Flynn,
threatening material injury to, an
Act) authorizes the Secretary of Director, Office of Trade and Economic
Analysis, International Trade Administration,
industry in the United States. Also,
Commerce to issue Export Trade consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the
Certificates of Review. An Export Trade U.S. Department of Commerce.
[FR Doc. 2018–03747 Filed 2–22–18; 8:45 am] Act, the Petition is accompanied by
Certificate of Review protects the holder information reasonably available to the
and the members identified in the BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
petitioner supporting its allegations.
Certificate from State and Federal
government antitrust actions and from Commerce finds that the petitioner
private treble damage antitrust actions DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE filed the Petition on behalf of the
for the export conduct specified in the domestic industry because the
International Trade Administration petitioner is an interested party as
Certificate and carried out in
compliance with its terms and defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act.
conditions. The regulations [A–570–079] Commerce also finds that the petitioner
implementing Title III are found at 15 demonstrated sufficient industry
Cast Iron Soil Pipe From the People’s
CFR part 325 (2015). OTEA is issuing support with respect to the initiation of
Republic of China: Initiation of Less-
this notice pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(b), the AD investigation that the petitioner
Than-Fair Value Investigation
which requires the Secretary of is requesting.6
Commerce to publish a summary of the AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
certification in the Federal Register. Period of Investigation
International Trade Administration,
Under Section 305(a) of the Act and 15 Department of Commerce. Because the Petition was filed on
CFR 325.11(a), any person aggrieved by January 26, 2018, pursuant to 19 CFR
DATES: Applicable February 15, 2018.
the Secretary’s determination may, 351.204(b)(1), the period of
within 30 days of the date of this notice, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
investigation (POI) is July 1, 2017,
bring an action in any appropriate Javier Barrientos at (202) 482–2243, AD/
through December 31, 2017.
district court of the United States to set CVD Operations, Enforcement &
aside the determination on the ground Compliance, International Trade Scope of the Investigation
that the determination is erroneous. Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue The product covered by this
Description of Certified Conduct NW, Washington, DC 20230. investigation is soil pipe from China.
CAEA’s Export Trade Certificate of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
For a full description of the scope of this
Review has been amended to: investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the
• Add Stewart & Jasper Marketing, Inc. The Petition Investigation,’’ in the Appendix to this
as a Member On January 26, 2018, the Department notice.
CAEA’s Export Trade Certificate of of Commerce (Commerce) received an Comments on the Scope of the
Review Membership, as amended, is antidumping duty (AD) petition Investigation
listed below: concerning imports of cast iron soil pipe
Almonds California Pride, Inc., (soil pipe) from the People’s Republic of On February 2, 2018, in response to
Caruthers, CA China (China), filed in proper form, on a question from Commerce, the
Baldwin-Minkler Farms, Orland, CA behalf of the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute petitioner filed a revision to the scope
Blue Diamond Growers, Sacramento, CA (the petitioner).1 The petitioner is a language.7
Campos Brothers, Caruthers, CA trade association, whose members are
Chico Nut Company, Chico, CA all domestic producers of soil pipe.2 4 See Letters from Commerce, ‘‘Petition for the
Del Rio Nut Company, Livingston, CA The AD petition was accompanied by a Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Fair Trade Corner, Inc., Chico, CA countervailing duty (CVD) petition for Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People’s Republic of
China: Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 31,
Fisher Nut Company, Modesto, CA soil pipe from China.3 2018, and ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of
Hilltop Ranch, Inc., Ballico, CA On January 31, 2018, Commerce Antidumping Duties on Imports of Cast Iron Soil
Hughson Nut, Inc., Hughson, CA requested additional information and Pipe from the People’s Republic of China: General
Mariani Nut Company, Winters, CA clarification of certain areas of the Issues Supplemental Questions,’’ dated January 31,
Nutco, LLC d.b.a. Spycher Brothers, 2018.
5 See Letters from the petitioner, ‘‘Cast Iron Soil
Turlock, CA 1 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Pipe from the People’s Republic of China: Response
P–R Farms, Inc., Clovis, CA
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
the petitioner re: Cast Iron Pipe from the People’s to Supplemental Questions—General Issues,’’ dated
Roche Brothers International Family Republic of China—Petition for the Imposition of February 2, 2018 (General Issues Supplement), and
Nut Co., Escalon, CA Antidumping and Countervailing Duties, dated ‘‘Cast Iron Soil Pipe from the People’s Republic of
RPAC, LLC, Los Banos, CA January 26, 2018 (Petition). China: Response to Supplemental Questions—
2 See Volume I of the Petition at 2. The individual Antidumping Duties,’’ dated February 2, 2018 (AD
South Valley Almond Company, LLC, Supplemental Response).
members of the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute are
Wasco, CA AB&I Foundry, Charlotte Pipe & Foundry, and Tyler 6 See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the
Stewart & Jasper Marketing, Inc., Pipe. Petition’’ section, below.
Newman, CA 3 See Volume III of the Petition. 7 See General Issues Supplement at Exhibit 1.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:52 Feb 22, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_8090/page/1.svg)
![8058 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Notices
purposes only; the written description of the on every party on Commerce’s service were collapsed, and (b) provide a
scope of this investigation is dispositive. list. citation to the proceeding in which they
[FR Doc. 2018–03751 Filed 2–22–18; 8:45 am] were collapsed. Further, if companies
Respondent Selection
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P are requested to complete the Quantity
In the event Commerce limits the and Value (Q&V) Questionnaire for
number of respondents for individual purposes of respondent selection, in
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE examination for administrative reviews general each company must report
initiated pursuant to requests made for volume and value data separately for
International Trade Administration the orders identified below, except for itself. Parties should not include data
the review of the antidumping duty for any other party, even if they believe
Initiation of Antidumping and order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic
Countervailing Duty Administrative they should be treated as a single entity
cells, whether or not assembled into with that other party. If a company was
Reviews modules (‘‘solar cells and modules’’) collapsed with another company or
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, from the People’s Republic of China companies in the most recently
International Trade Administration, (China), Commerce intends to select completed segment of this proceeding
Department of Commerce. respondents based on U.S. Customs and where Commerce considered collapsing
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. that entity, complete Q&V data for that
(Commerce) has received requests to imports during the period of review. We collapsed entity must be submitted.
conduct administrative reviews of intend to place the CBP data on the
record within five days of publication of In the event the Commerce limits the
various antidumping and countervailing number of respondents for individual
duty orders and findings with December the initiation notice and to make our
decision regarding respondent selection examination in the administrative
anniversary dates. In accordance with review of the antidumping duty order
Commerce’s regulations, we are within 30 days of publication of the
initiation Federal Register notice. on solar cells and modules from the
initiating those administrative reviews. PRC, the Commerce intends to select
Comments regarding the CBP data and
DATES: Applicable February 23, 2018. respondents based on volume data
respondent selection should be
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: submitted seven days after the contained in responses to Q&V
Brenda E. Brown, Office of AD/CVD placement of the CBP data on the record Questionnaires. Further, Commerce
Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, of this review. Parties wishing to submit intends to limit the number of Q&V
Enforcement and Compliance, rebuttal comments should submit those Questionnaires issued in the review
International Trade Administration, comments five days after the deadline based on CBP data for U.S. imports of
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 for the initial comments. solar cells and solar modules from the
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, In the event Commerce decides it is PRC. The units used to measure the
DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–4735. necessary to limit individual imported quantities of solar cells and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: examination of respondents and solar modules are ‘‘number’’; however,
conduct respondent selection under it would not be meaningful to sum the
Background number of imported solar cells and the
section 777A(c)(2) of the Act:
Commerce has received timely In general, Commerce has found that number of imported solar modules in
requests, in accordance with 19 CFR determinations concerning whether attempting to determine the largest PRC
351.213(b), for administrative reviews of particular companies should be exporters of subject merchandise by
various antidumping and countervailing ‘‘collapsed’’ (e.g., treated as a single volume. Therefore, Commerce will limit
duty orders and findings with December entity for purposes of calculating the number of Q&V Questionnaires
anniversary dates. antidumping duty rates) require a issued based on the import values in
All deadlines for the submission of substantial amount of detailed CBP data which will serve as a proxy for
various types of information, information and analysis, which often imported quantities. Parties subject to
certifications, or comments or actions by require follow-up questions and the review to which Commerce does not
Commerce discussed below refer to the analysis. Accordingly, Commerce will send a Q&V Questionnaire may file a
number of calendar days from the not conduct collapsing analyses at the response to the Q&V Questionnaire by
applicable starting time. respondent selection phase of this the applicable deadline if they desire to
Notice of No Sales review and will not collapse companies be included in the pool of companies
at the respondent selection phase unless from which Commerce will select
If a producer or exporter named in there has been a determination to mandatory respondents. The Q&V
this notice of initiation had no exports, collapse certain companies in a Questionnaire will be available on
sales, or entries during the period of previous segment of this antidumping Commerce’s website at http://trade.gov/
review (POR), it must notify Commerce proceeding (e.g., investigation, enforcement/news.asp on the date of
within 30 days of publication of this administrative review, new shipper publication of this notice in the Federal
notice in the Federal Register. All review or changed circumstances Register. The responses to the Q&V
submissions must be filed electronically review). For any company subject to this Questionnaire must be received by
at http://access.trade.gov in accordance review, if Commerce determined, or Commerce no later than 21 days after
with 19 CFR 351.303.1 Such continued to treat, that company as the signature date of this initiation
submissions are subject to verification collapsed with others, Commerce will notice. Please be advised that due to the
in accordance with section 782(i) of the assume that such companies continue to time constraints imposed by the
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). operate in the same manner and will statutory and regulatory deadlines for
Further, in accordance with 19 CFR collapse them for respondent selection antidumping duty administrative
351.303(f)(1)(i), a copy must be served purposes. Otherwise, Commerce will reviews, Commerce does not intend to
1 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
not collapse companies for purposes of grant any extensions for the submission
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
respondent selection. Parties are of responses to the Q&V Questionnaire.
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR requested to (a) identify which Parties will be given the opportunity to
39263 (July 6, 2011). companies subject to review previously comment on the CBP data used by
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:52 Feb 22, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23FEN1.SGM 23FEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_8090/page/6.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-23 01:32:26
Document Modified: 2018-02-23 01:32:26
| 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 February 15, 2018. | |
| Contact | Javier Barrientos at (202) 482-2243, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement & Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 8053 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR