Forged Steel Fittings From India: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
| Citation | 85 FR 66535 |
| Record Number | 2020-23272 |
| Published date | 20 October 2020 |
| Section | Notices |
| Court | International Trade Administration |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 203 (Tuesday, October 20, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 203 (Tuesday, October 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66535-66537]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23272]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-533-892]
Forged Steel Fittings From India: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination
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 forged steel fittings (FSF) from India.
DATES: Applicable October 20, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren Caserta, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4737.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 30, 2020, Commerce published the Preliminary Determination
of the countervailing duty (CVD) investigation, which aligned the final
determination in this CVD investigation with the final determination in
the companion antidumping duty investigation of FSF from India.\1\ On
June 18, 2020, Commerce published the Amended Preliminary Determination
in this investigation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Forged Steel Fittings from India: Preliminary
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, and Alignment of
Final Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 85 FR
17536 (March 30, 2020) (Preliminary Determination), and accompanying
Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
\2\ See Forged Steel Fittings from India: Amended Preliminary
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 85 FR 36835 (June 18,
2020) (Amended Preliminary Determination), and accompanying Amended
Preliminary Scope Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the events that occurred since Commerce published the
Amended Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the
issues raised by parties for this final determination, are discussed in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this
notice.\3\ 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. In
addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html.
The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decisions Memorandum for the
Final Determination of the Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Forged Steel Fittings from India,'' dated concurrently with, and
hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decisions Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation is January 1, 2018 through December 31,
2018.
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are forged steel
fittings from India. For a complete description of the scope of this
investigation, see Appendix I.
Scope Comments
On May 20, 2020, Commerce issued an Amended Preliminary Scope
Memorandum. We received comments from interested parties on the Amended
Preliminary Scope Memorandum, which we address in the Final Scope
Decision Memorandum, dated contemporaneously with, and hereby adopted
by, this final determination.\4\ Commerce is modifying the scope
language as it appeared in the Amended Preliminary Determination. See
the revised scope in Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Memorandum, ``Forged Steel Fittings from India and the
Republic of Korea: Final Scope Decision Memorandum,'' dated October
13, 2020; see also IPI's Letter, ``Response to Scope Preliminary
Determinations: Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Forged Steel Fittings from India and Korea (A-533-891, C-533-892, A-
580-904),'' dated June 26, 2020; Ramkrishna's Letters, ``Forged
Steel Fittings from India and Korea: Response to Req for
Clarification RE Scope Prelim Determination. IPI 3/26/2020,'' dated
July 3, 2020, ``Forged Steel Fittings from India and Korea: Response
to the Department of Commerce's Preliminary Determination from Titus
PVF Group Inc. (``Titus'') dated June 29th, 2020,'' dated July 5,
2020, and ``Forged Steel Fittings from India and Korea: Response to
Req for Clarification RE Scope Prelim Determination. IPI 3/26/
2020,'' dated July 6, 2020; S.P.M. Flow's Letter, ``Forged Steel
Fittings from India and Korea: Response Clarification RE Scope
Prelim Determination,'' dated July 6, 2020; and Petitioners' Letter,
``Forged Steel Fittings from India and Korea: Scope Rebuttal
Comments,'' dated July 6, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received
The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in
the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are
discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues
that parties raised is attached to this notice as Appendix II.
Methodology
Commerce conducted this investigation in accordance with section
701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the
subsidy programs found countervailable, Commerce determines that there
is a subsidy, i.e., a financial contribution by an ``authority'' that
gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is
specific.\5\ For a full description of the methodology underlying our
final determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding
financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding
benefit; and section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Verification
Commerce normally verifies information relied upon in making its
final determination, pursuant to section 782(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act). However, during the course of this
investigation, we were unable to conduct on-site verification due to
travel restrictions.\6\ Consistent
[[Page 66536]]
with section 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act, Commerce relied on the
information submitted on the record, which we used in making our
Preliminary Determination and in the Amended Preliminary Determination,
as facts available in making our final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Forged Steel Fittings from India: Verification and Schedule for
Submission of Case and Rebuttal Briefs,'' dated August 3, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Determination and Amended Preliminary
Determination
Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from
parties, we made certain changes to the subsidy rate calculations for
Shakti Forge Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Shakti Forge (collectively,
Shakti). For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
All-Others Rate
We continue to assign the countervailable subsidy rate calculated
for Shakti as the all-others rate applicable to all exporters and/or
producers not individually examined.
Final Determination
Commerce determines the total estimated net countervailable subsidy
rates to be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsidy rate
Company ad valorem
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shakti Forge Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Shakti Forge 2.64
(collectively, Shakti).................................
Nikoo Forge Pvt. Ltd., Pan International, Patton 300.77
International Limited, Sage Metals Limited, Kirtanlal
Steel Private Limited, Disha Auto Components Private
Limited, Dynamic Flow Products, Sara Sae Private
Limited, and Parveen Industries Private Limited........
All Others.............................................. 2.64
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
Commerce intends to disclose to interested parties the calculations
and analysis performed in this final determination within five days of
any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within
five days of the date of the publication of this notice in proceeding
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation
As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to
sections 703(d)(1)(B) and (d)(2) of the Act, Commerce instructed U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries
of subject merchandise under consideration from India that were entered
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 30,
2020, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the
Federal Register. In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act,
effective July 28, 2020, we instructed CBP to discontinue the
suspension of liquidation of all entries at that time, but to continue
the suspension of liquidation of all entries between March 30, 2020 and
July 27, 2020.
If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final
affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and require
a cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties for such entries of
subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above, in accordance with
section 706(a) of the Act. 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.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, Commerce will notify
the ITC of its final affirmative determination that countervailable
subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of FSF from
India. As Commerce's final determination is affirmative, in accordance
with section 705(b) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days,
whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially
injured, or threatened with material injury. In addition, we are making
available to the ITC all non-privileged and nonproprietary information
related 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 Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties
subject to the APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction
of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19
CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms
of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
Notification to Interested Parties
This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections
705(d) and 771(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).
Dated: October 13, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I
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,
unions (including hammer unions), and outlets. Forged steel fittings
are covered regardless of end finish, whether threaded, socket-weld
or other end connections. The scope includes integrally reinforced
forged branch outlet fittings, regardless of whether they have one
or more ends that is a socket welding, threaded, butt welding end,
or other end connections.
While these fittings are generally manufactured to
specifications ASME B16.11, MSS SP-79, MSS SP-83, MSS-SP-97, 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 it does not reference
an exclusive manufacturing process. Forged steel fittings are not
manufactured from casings. Pursuant to the applicable standards,
fittings may also be machined from bar stock or machined from
seamless pipe and tube.
All types of forged steel 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 class rating (expressed in
pounds of pressure, e.g., 2,000 or 2M; 3,000 or 3M;
[[Page 66537]]
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, nipples, and all
fittings that have a maximum pressure rating of 300 pounds per
square inch/PSI or less.
Also excluded from the scope are fittings certified or made to
the following standards, so long as the fittings are not also
manufactured to the specifications of ASME B16.11, MSS SP-79, MSS
SP-83, MSS SP-97, ASTM A105, ASTM A350 and ASTM A182:
American Petroleum Institute (API) 5CT, API 5L, or API
11B;
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) B16.9;
Manufacturers Standardization Society (MSS) SP-75;
Society of Automotive Engineering (SAE) J476, SAE J514,
SAE J516, SAE J517, SAE J518, SAE J1026, SAE J1231, SAE J1453, SAE
J1926, J2044 or SAE AS 35411;
Hydraulic hose fittings (e.g., fittings used in high
pressure water cleaning applications, in the manufacture of
hydraulic engines, to connect rubber dispensing hoses to a
dispensing nozzle or grease fitting) made to ISO 12151-1, 12151-2,
12151-3, 12151-4, 12151-5, or 12151-6;
Underwriter's Laboratories (UL) certified electrical
conduit fittings;
ASTM A153, A536, A576, or A865;
Casing conductor connectors made to proprietary
specifications;
Machined steel parts (e.g., couplers) that are not
certified to any specifications in this scope description and that
are not for connecting steel pipes for distributing gas and liquids;
Oil country tubular goods (OCTG) connectors (e.g.,
forged steel tubular connectors for API 5L pipes or OCTG for
offshore oil and gas drilling and extraction);
Military Specification (MIL) MIL-C-4109F and MIL-F-
3541; and
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
ISO6150-B.
Also excluded from the scope are assembled or unassembled hammer
unions that consist of a nut and two subs. To qualify for this
exclusion, the hammer union must meet each of the following
criteria: (1) The face of the nut of the hammer union is permanently
marked with one of the following markings: ``FIG 100,'' ``FIG 110,''
``FIG 100C,'' ``FIG 200,'' ``FIG 200C,'' ``FIG 201,'' ``FIG 202,''
``FIG 206,'' ``FIG 207,'' ``FIG 211,'' ``FIG 300,'' ``FIG 301,''
``FIG 400,'' ``FIG 600,'' ``FIG 602,'' ``FIG 607,'' ``FIG 1002,''
``FIG 1003,'' ``FIG 1502,'' ``FIG 1505,'' ``FIG 2002,'' or ``FIG
2202''; (2) the hammer union does not bear any of the following
markings: ``Class 3000,'' ``Class 3M,'' ``Class 6000,'' ``Class
6M,'' ``Class 9000,'' or ``Class 9M''; and (3) the nut and both subs
of the hammer union are painted.
Also excluded from the scope are subs or wingnuts made to ASTM
A788, marked with ``FIG 1002,'' ``FIG 1502,'' or ``FIG 2002,'' and
with a pressure rating of 10,000 PSI or greater. These parts are
made from AISI/SAE 4130, 4140, or 4340 steel and are 100 percent
magnetic particle inspected before shipment.
Also excluded from the scope are tee, elbow, cross, adapter (or
``crossover''), blast joint (or ``spacer''), blind sub, swivel joint
and pup joint which have wing nut or not. To qualify for this
exclusion, these products must meet each of the following criteria:
(1) Manufacturing and Inspection standard is API 6A or API 16C; and,
(2) body or wing nut is permanently marked with one of the following
markings: ``FIG 2002,'' ``FIG 1502,'' ``FIG 1002,'' ``FIG 602,''
``FIG 206,'' or ``FIG any other number'' or MTR (Material Test
Report) shows these FIG numbers.
To be excluded from the scope, products must have the
appropriate standard or pressure markings and/or be accompanied by
documentation showing product compliance to the applicable standard
or pressure, e.g., ``API 5CT'' mark and/or a mill certification
report.
Subject carbon and alloy forged steel fittings are normally
entered under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) 7307.92.3010, 7307.92.3030, 7307.92.9000, 7307.99.1000,
7307.99.3000, 7307.99.5045, and 7307.99.5060. They may also be
entered under HTSUS 7307.93.3010, 7307.93.3040, 7307.93.6000,
7307.93.9010, 7307.93.9040, 7307.93.9060, and 7326.19.0010.
The HTSUS subheadings and specifications are provided for
convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the
scope is dispositive.
Appendix II
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum:
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Investigation
IV. Scope Comments
V. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences: Non-
Cooperative and Non-Responsive Companies
VI. Subsidies Valuation
VII. Analysis of Programs
VIII. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether Commerce Should Include the
Integrated Goods & Service Tax (IGST) in the Calculation of the
Benefit Received From the Export Promotion of Capital Goods Scheme
(EPCGS) Program
Comment 2: Whether Commerce Should Revise Its
Calculation of the Benefit for the Provision of Water for Less Than
Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) Program
Comment 3: Whether the Duty Drawback (DDB) Program Is
Countervailable
Comment 4: Whether the EPCGS Program Is Countervailable
Comment 5: Whether the MEIS Program Is Countervailable
Comment 6: Whether the State Government of Gujarat
(SGOG) Scheme of Assistance to Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises
(MSME): Assistance of One-Time Capital Investment Subsidy and the
SGOG Scheme of Assistance to MSME: Assistance for Interest Subsidy
Programs Are Countervailable
Comment 7: Whether the Gujarat Industrial Development
Corporation (GIDC) Provision of Water for Less Than Adequate
Remuneration (LTAR) Is Countervailable
IX. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2020-23272 Filed 10-19-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
