Skip to Content

Notice

Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India and Taiwan; Expedited Five-year (Sunset) Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders; Final Results

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble

AGENCY:

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY:

On July 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on forged stainless steel flanges (flanges) from India and Taiwan, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). On the basis of the notice of intent to participate and an adequate substantive response filed on behalf of domestic interested parties and no responses from respondent interested parties, the Department conducted expedited sunset reviews. As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on flanges from India and Taiwan would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of Reviews.”

EFFECTIVE DATE:

November 4, 2005.

Start Further Info

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dana Mermelstein, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone (202) 482-1391.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On July 1, 2005, the Department initiated sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on flanges from India and Taiwan pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews, 70 FR 38101 (July 1, 2005). The Department received a notice of intent to participate from two domestic interested parties, Gerlin, Inc. and Maass Flange Corporation (collectively, petitioners), within the deadline specified in 19 C.F.R. § 351.218(d)(1)(i). Petitioners claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act as U.S. producers of a domestic like product. We received a complete substantive response from petitioners within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 C.F.R. § 351.218(d)(3)(i). However, we did not receive responses from any respondent interested parties. As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 C.F.R. § 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department conducted expedited sunset reviews of the orders.

Scope of the Orders

The products covered by these orders are certain forged stainless steel flanges, both finished and not finished, generally manufactured to specification ASTM A-182, and made in alloys such as 304, 304L, 316, and 316L. The scope includes five general types of flanges. They are weld-neck, used for butt-weld line connections; threaded, used for threaded line connections; slip-on and lap joint, used with stub-ends/ butt-weld line connections; socket weld, used to fit pipe into a machined recession; and blind, used to seal off a line. The sizes of the flanges within the scope range generally from one to six inches; however, all sizes of the above-described merchandise are included in the scope. Specifically excluded from the scope of these orders are cast stainless steel flanges. Cast stainless steel flanges generally are manufactured to specification ASTM A-351. The flanges subject to these orders are currently classifiable under subheadings 7307.21.1000 and 7307.21.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under review is dispositive of whether or not the merchandise is covered by the scope of the orders.

These sunset reviews cover imports from all manufacturers and exporters of flanges from India and Taiwan except Viraj Forgings, Ltd., for which the order on flanges from India was revoked.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in this case are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated October 31, 2005 (Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues discussed in the Decision Start Printed Page 67138Memorandum include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margin likely to prevail if the orders were revoked. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in these sunset reviews and the corresponding recommendation in this public memorandum, which is on file in room B-099 of the main Department building.

In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov, under the heading “November 2005.” The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Final Results of Reviews

We determine that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on flanges from India and Taiwan would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the following percentage weighted-average margins:

Manufacturers/Exporters/ProducersWeighted-Average Margin (Percent)
India
Mukand, Ltd.210.00
Sunstar Metals Ltd.210.00
Bombay Forgings Pvt. Ltd.210.00
Dynaforge Forgings India, Ltd.210.00
Akai Impex Pvt., Ltd.18.56
All Others162.14
Taiwan
Enlin Steel Corporation48.00
Ta Chen Stainless Pipe Co., Ltd.48.00
Tay Precision Industries Co., Ltd.48.00
All Others48.00

This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 C.F.R. § 351.305. Timely notification of the return or 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.

We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Start Signature

Dated: October 31, 2005.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

End Signature End Supplemental Information

[FR Doc. E5-6127 Filed 11-3-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S