[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 204 (Monday, October 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64468-64471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25970]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-853]


Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India: Final 
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') has determined 
that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and 
exporters of circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe (``circular 
welded pipe'') from India. For information on the estimated 
countervailing duty rates, see the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' 
section, below.

DATES: Effective Date: October 22, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Subler, Thomas Schauer, or David 
Layton, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-0189, (202) 482-0410, and (202) 482-0371, respectively.

Petitioners

    The petitioners in this investigation are Allied Tube and Conduit, 
JMC Steel Group, United States Steel Corporation, and Wheatland Tube 
Corporation (``Wheatland'') (collectively, ``Petitioners'').

Period of Investigation

    The period for which we are measuring subsidies, or period of 
investigation, is April 1, 2010, through March 31, 2011.

Case History

    The following events have occurred since the publication of the 
preliminary determination.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India: 
Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and 
Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determination With Final 
Antidumping Duty Determination, 77 FR 19192 (March 30, 2012) 
(``Preliminary Determination'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We received a case brief from the Government of India (``GOI'') on 
May 21, 2012. Wheatland submitted a rebuttal brief on May 29, 2012.
    Zenith Birla (India) Ltd. (``Zenith'') submitted a case brief on 
May 23, 2012. We rejected Zenith's case brief and removed it from the 
record because it contained new factual information. We requested that 
Zenith re-submit its case brief without the new factual information.\2\ 
Zenith did not re-submit its case brief. Accordingly, we did not 
consider the arguments Zenith made in the case brief we rejected and 
removed from the record of this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See letter from Susan Kuhbach to Zenith dated May 24, 2012, 
and Memorandum from David Layton to File dated May 24, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The GOI and Wheatland each requested a hearing on April 30, 2012. 
We held the hearing on August 6, 2012.

Scope of the Investigation

    This investigation covers welded carbon-quality steel pipes and 
tube, of circular cross-section, with an outside diameter (``O.D.'') 
not more than 16 inches (406.4 mm), regardless of wall thickness, 
surface finish (e.g., black, galvanized, or painted), end finish (plain 
end, beveled end, grooved, threaded, or threaded and coupled), or 
industry specification (e.g., American Society for Testing and 
Materials International (``ASTM''), proprietary, or other) generally 
known as standard pipe, fence pipe and tube, sprinkler pipe, and 
structural pipe (although subject product may also be referred to as 
mechanical tubing). Specifically, the term ``carbon quality'' includes 
products in which: (a) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the 
other contained elements; (b) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, 
by weight; and (c) none of the elements listed below exceeds the 
quantity, by weight, as indicated:
    (i) 1.80 percent of manganese;
    (ii) 2.25 percent of silicon;
    (iii) 1.00 percent of copper;
    (iv) 0.50 percent of aluminum;
    (v) 1.25 percent of chromium;

[[Page 64469]]

    (vi) 0.30 percent of cobalt;
    (vii) 0.40 percent of lead;
    (viii) 1.25 percent of nickel;
    (ix) 0.30 percent of tungsten;
    (x) 0.15 percent of molybdenum;
    (xi) 0.10 percent of niobium;
    (xii) 0.41 percent of titanium;
    (xiii) 0.15 percent of vanadium;
    (xiv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.
    Subject pipe is ordinarily made to ASTM specifications A53, A135, 
and A795, but can also be made to other specifications. Structural pipe 
is made primarily to ASTM specifications A252 and A500. Standard and 
structural pipe may also be produced to proprietary specifications 
rather than to industry specifications. Fence tubing is included in the 
scope regardless of certification to a specification listed in the 
exclusions below, and can also be made to the ASTM A513 specification. 
Sprinkler pipe is designed for sprinkler fire suppression systems and 
may be made to industry specifications such as ASTM A53 or to 
proprietary specifications. These products are generally made to 
standard O.D. and wall thickness combinations. Pipe multi-stenciled to 
a standard and/or structural specification and to other specifications, 
such as American Petroleum Institute (``API'') API-5L specification, is 
also covered by the scope of this investigation when it meets the 
physical description set forth above, and also has one or more of the 
following characteristics: Is 32 feet in length or less; is less than 
2.0 inches (50mm) in outside diameter; has a galvanized and/or painted 
(e.g., polyester coated) surface finish; or has a threaded and/or 
coupled end finish.
    The scope of this investigation does not include: (a) Pipe suitable 
for use in boilers, superheaters, heat exchangers, refining furnaces 
and feedwater heaters, whether or not cold drawn; (b) finished 
electrical conduit; (c) finished scaffolding; \3\ (d) tube and pipe 
hollows for redrawing; (e) oil country tubular goods produced to API 
specifications; (f) line pipe produced to only API specifications; and 
(g) mechanical tubing, whether or not cold-drawn. However, products 
certified to ASTM mechanical tubing specifications are not excluded as 
mechanical tubing if they otherwise meet the standard sizes (e.g., 
outside diameter and wall thickness) of standard, structural, fence and 
sprinkler pipe. Also, products made to the following outside diameter 
and wall thickness combinations, which are recognized by the industry 
as typical for fence tubing, would not be excluded from the scope based 
solely on their being certified to ASTM mechanical tubing 
specifications:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Finished scaffolding is defined as component parts of a 
final, finished scaffolding that enters the United States 
unassembled as a ``kit.'' A ``kit'' is understood to mean a packaged 
combination of component parts that contain, at the time of 
importation, all the necessary component parts to fully assemble a 
final, finished scaffolding.

1.315 inch O.D. and 0.035 inch wall thickness (gage 20)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.083 inch wall thickness (gage 14)
1.315 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.083 inch wall thickness (gage 14)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
1.660 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
1.900 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.047 inch wall thickness (gage 18)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.055 inch wall thickness (gage 17)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.065 inch wall thickness (gage 16)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.072 inch wall thickness (gage 15)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.095 inch wall thickness (gage 13)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
2.375 inch O.D. and 0.120 inch wall thickness (gage 11)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.134 inch wall thickness (gage 10)
2.875 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall thickness (gage 8)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.109 inch wall thickness (gage 12)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.148 inch wall thickness (gage 9)
3.500 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall thickness (gage 8)
4.000 inch O.D. and 0.148 inch wall thickness (gage 9)
4.000 inch O.D. and 0.165 inch wall thickness (gage 8)
4.500 inch O.D. and 0.203 inch wall thickness (gage 7)

    The pipe subject to this investigation is currently classifiable in 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') statistical 
reporting numbers 7306.19.1010, 7306.19.1050, 7306.19.5110, 
7306.19.5150, 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, 
7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, 7306.30.5090, 7306.50.1000, 7306.50.5050, 
and 7306.50.5070. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
merchandise under the investigation is dispositive.

Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
set aside a period of time in our initiation notice for parties to 
raise issues regarding product coverage, and encouraged all parties to 
submit comments within 20 calendar days of publication of that 
notice.\4\ As described in the Preliminary Determination, SeAH Steel 
VINA Corp. (``SeAH VINA'') filed comments on December 5, 2011, urging 
the Department to modify the scope description. No further comments on 
this issue were received. For the reasons explained in the Preliminary 
Determination, the Department is not adopting SeAH VINA's proposed 
modification of the scope.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997), and Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe 
From India, the Sultanate of Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and the 
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 
Investigations, 76 FR 72173 (November 22, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because India is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
``Act''), section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. 
Accordingly, the U.S. International Trade Commission (``ITC'') must 
determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from India 
materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. On 
December 16, 2011, the ITC published its affirmative preliminary 
determination that there is a reasonable indication that

[[Page 64470]]

an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of 
allegedly subsidized imports of circular welded pipe from India.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From India, 
Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Vietnam; Determinations, 76 FR 
78313 (December 16, 2011) and Investigation Nos. 701-TA-482-485 and 
731-TA-1191-1194 (Preliminary) (December 12, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this investigation are addressed in the Memorandum from Christian 
Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, entitled ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Circular 
Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from India'' (October 15, 2012) 
(hereafter ``Decision Memorandum''), which is hereby adopted by this 
notice. Attached to this notice as an Appendix is a list of the issues 
that parties have raised and to which we have responded in the Decision 
Memorandum. This Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on 
file electronically via Import Administration's Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA 
ACCESS''). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), room 7046 
of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete 
version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the 
Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum 
and the electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content.

Use of Adverse Facts Available

    For purposes of this final determination, we have continued to rely 
on facts available and to draw an adverse inference, in accordance with 
sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, to determine the subsidy rates for 
the mandatory respondents. For a full discussion of these issues, see 
the Decision Memorandum, at ``Use of Facts Otherwise Available and 
Adverse Facts Available.''

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we have 
calculated individual rates for each producer/exporter of the subject 
merchandise individually investigated. With respect to the all-others 
rate, section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act provides that if the 
countervailable subsidy rates established for all exporters and 
producers individually investigated are determined entirely in 
accordance with section 776 of the Act, the Department may use any 
reasonable method to establish an all-others rate for exporters and 
producers not individually investigated. The Court of International 
Trade recently concluded that the statute permits the Department to use 
mandatory respondents' AFA rates in the calculation of the all-others 
rate.\6\ The Court found this methodology reasonable. In this case, the 
rate calculated for both of the investigated companies is based 
entirely on facts available under section 776 of the Act. There is no 
other information on the record upon which to determine an all-others 
rate. As a result, we have used the adverse facts available (``AFA'') 
rate assigned for Lloyds Metals and Engineers Ltd. and Zenith as the 
all-others rate. This method is consistent with the Department's past 
practice.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See MacLean-Fogg Co. v United States, 836 F. Supp. 2d 1267, 
1374-1375 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2012).
    \7\ See, e.g., Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determination: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From 
Argentina, 66 FR 37007, 37008 (July 16, 2001); see also Final 
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Prestressed Concrete 
Steel Wire Strand From India, 68 FR 68356 (December 8, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We determine the total countervailable subsidy rates to be as 
follows.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Net subsidy
                  Exporter/manufacturer                        rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lloyds Metals and Engineers Ltd.........................          285.95
Zenith Birla (India) Ltd................................          285.95
All Others..............................................          285.95
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of our Preliminary Determination, we instructed U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to suspend liquidation of all 
entries of circular welded pipe from India which were entered or 
withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after March 30, 2012, 
the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the 
Federal Register, and to collect cash deposits or bonds in the amount 
of the preliminary countervailing duty rates. In accordance with 
section 703(d) of the Act, we later issued instructions to CBP to 
discontinue the suspension of liquidation for countervailing duty 
purposes for subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse on 
or after July 28, 2012, but to continue the suspension of liquidation 
of all entries from March 30, 2012 through July 27, 2012.
    We will issue a countervailing duty order and reinstate the 
suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act if the U.S. 
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') issues a final affirmative 
injury determination, and will require a cash deposit of estimated 
countervailing duties for such entries in the amounts indicated above. 
If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material 
injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all 
estimated deposits 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, we will notify the 
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the 
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary 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 APO, without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary 
for Import Administration.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury 
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties 
subject to an administrative protective order (``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.
    This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 
777(i) of the Act.

     Dated: October 15, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum

Comment 1 Whether the GOI Cooperated to the Best of Its Ability and 
Should Not Be Subject to the AFA Rate that the Department 
Preliminarily Applied

[[Page 64471]]

Comment 2 Whether the Application of the AFA Standard Is 
Inconsistent with Article 12.7 of ASCM
Comment 3 Whether the Department's Application of AFA With Respect 
to Provision of Hot-Rolled Steel by SAIL For LTAR Was Justified
Comment 4 Whether the Department's Application of AFA With Respect 
to Provision of Land For LTAR Was Justified
Comment 5 Whether the Department Erred in Calculating the Subsidy 
Rate It Assigned in the Preliminary Determination

[FR Doc. 2012-25970 Filed 10-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P