Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Notices 26959 

7See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of 

the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 

Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping 

Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8102 

(February 14, 2012) (Final Modification for 

Reviews). 

8See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from 

India, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, the Republic 

of Turkey, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 

Antidumping Duty Orders; and Certain Oil Country 

Tubular Goods from the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam: Amended Final Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value, 79 FR 53691, 53693 

(September 10, 2014). 

1See Stainless Steel Flanges from the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 

FR 13244 (March 28, 2018) (Preliminary 

Determination), and accompanying Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum. 

Assessment Rates 

Upon completion of the final results, 

Commerce shall determine and U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

shall assess antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries. If Yu ̈ cel’s weightedaverage dumping margin is above de 

minimis in the final results of this 

review, we will calculate an importerspecific assessment rate on the basis of 

the ratio of the total amount of 

antidumping duties calculated for each 

importer’s examined sales and the total 

entered value of the sales in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). If Yu ̈ cel’s 

weighted-average dumping margin is 

zero or de minimis in the final results 

of review, we will instruct CBP not to 

assess duties on any of its entries in 

accordance with the Final Modification 

for Reviews.7

For entries of subject merchandise 

during the POR produced by Yu ̈ cel for 

which it did not know its merchandise 

was destined for the United States, we 

will instruct CBP to liquidate 

unreviewed entries at the all-others rate 

if there is no rate for the intermediate 

company(ies) involved in the 

transaction. 

For the companies which were not 

selected for individual examination, 

C ̧ayirova Boru San A.S ̧., HG Tubulars 

Canada Ltd., and Yu ̈ celboru I ̇hracat, 

Ithalat, we will instruct CBP to apply 

the rates listed above to all entries of 

subject merchandise produced and/or 

exported by these firms. 

We intend to issue liquidation 

instructions to CBP 15 days after 

publication of the final results of this 

review. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following deposit requirements 

will be effective upon publication of the 

notice of final results of administrative 

review for all shipments of OCTG from 

Turkey entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

the date of publication as provided by 

section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash 

deposit rate for companies subject to 

this review will be the rates established 

in the final results of the review; (2) for 

merchandise exported by producers or 

exporters not covered in this review but 

covered in a prior segment of the 

proceeding, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the company-specific rate 

published for the most recent period; (3) 

if the exporter is not a firm covered in 

this review, a prior review, or the 

original investigation but the producer 

is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recent period 

for the producer of the merchandise; (4) 

the cash deposit rate for all other 

producers or exporters will continue to 

be 35.86 percent,8 the all-others rate 

established in the less-than-fair-value 

investigation, adjusted for the exportsubsidy rate established in the 

companion countervailing duty 

investigation. These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a preliminary 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 

regarding the reimbursement of 

antidumping duties prior to liquidation 

of the relevant entries during this 

review period. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in the 

Secretary’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.221. 

Dated: June 5, 2018. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Allegation of a Particular Market 

Situation 

V. Preliminary Finding of No Shipments 

VI. Rates for Respondents Not Selected for 

Individual Examination 

VII. Discussion of the Methodology 

Comparisons to Normal Value 

A. Determination of Comparison Method 

B. Results of Differential Pricing Analysis 

Product Comparisons 

Date of Sale 

Export Price 

Normal Value 

A. Home Market Viability and Comparison 

Market 

B. Level of Trade 

C. Cost of Production 

1. Calculation of Cost of Production 

2. Test of Comparison Market Sales Prices 

3. Results of the COP Test 

D. Calculation of Normal Value Based on 

Comparison Market Prices 

VIII. Currency Conversion 

IX. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2018–12479 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–064] 

Stainless Steel Flanges From the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Affirmative Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) determines that 

stainless steel flanges from the People’s 

Republic of China (China) are being, or 

are likely to be, sold in the United States 

at less than fair value (LTFV). The 

period of investigation (POI) is January 

1, 2017, through June 30, 2017. The 

final dumping margins of sales at LTFV 

are listed below in the ‘‘Final 

Determination’’ section of this notice. 

DATES: Applicable June 11, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian 

Hamilton or Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office V, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–4798 or (202) 482–2593, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This final determination is made in 

accordance with section 735(a) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 

On March 28, 2018, Commerce 

published the preliminary affirmative 

determination of sales at LTFV in the 

investigation of stainless steel flanges 

from China.1 We invited interested 

parties to comment on the Preliminary 

Determination. We received no 

comments from interested parties. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
26960 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Notices 

2See Preliminary Determination, 83 FR at 13244; 

see also Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 8– 

10. 

3Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 10–15. 

4See Stainless Steel Flanges from India and the 

People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigations, 82 FR 42649 (September 

11, 2017); see also Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Stainless 

Steel Flanges from the People’s Republic of China 

and India: Petitions for the Imposition of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,’’ dated 

August 16, 2017 (Petition); Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum at 13–15. 

5See Policy Bulletin 05.1, Separate-Rates Practice 

and Application of Combination Rates in 

Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market 

Economy Countries, dated April 5, 2005, available 

at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf. 

6See HFC’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Stainless Steel 

Flanges from the People’s Republic of China: 

Withdrawal from Active Participation by HydroFluid Controls Limited,’’ dated October 12, 2017; 

Songhai’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Stainless Steel Flanges 

from the People’s Republic of China: Withdrawal 

from Active Participation by Songhai Flange 

Manufacturing Co. Ltd.,’’ dated October 13, 2017; 

Dongtai’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Stainless Steel Flanges 

from the People’s Republic of China: Withdrawal 

from Active Participation by Dongtai QB Stainless 

Steel Co., Ltd,’’ dated November 28, 2017. 

7See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 10; 

see also Petition; Memorandum, ‘‘Quantity and 

Value Questionnaires Delivery Confirmation,’’ 

dated September 20, 2017. 

8See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative 

Preliminary Determination of Critical 

Circumstances and Postponement of Final 

Determination: Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 68 FR 4986, 4991– 

92 (January 31, 2003); unchanged in Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Affirmative Critical Circumstances: Certain Frozen 

Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 

68 FR 37116 (June 23, 2003). 

9See Stainless Steel Flanges from India and the 

People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigations, 82 FR 42649, 42653 

(September 11, 2017) (Initiation Notice). 

Scope of the Investigation 

The products covered by this 

investigation are stainless steel flanges 

from China. For a complete description 

of the scope of this investigation, see the 

Appendix to this notice. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

As noted above, we received no 

comments in response to the 

Preliminary Determination. For the 

purposes of the final determination, 

Commerce has made no changes to the 

Preliminary Determination. 

Use of Adverse Facts Available 

We continue to find that the 

mandatory respondent in this 

investigation, Shanxi Guanjiaying 

Flange Forging Group Co., Ltd (GJY), 

did not provide requested information, 

withheld requested information, 

significantly impeded this investigation, 

and did not cooperate to the best of its 

ability to comply with Commerce’s 

request for information in failing to 

submit a complete and reliable sales 

reconciliation, as detailed in the 

Preliminary Determination and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum.2 Accordingly, we 

continue to determine it appropriate to 

apply facts otherwise available, with an 

adverse inference, in accordance with 

sections 776(a)–(b) of the Act.3 As AFA, 

we have continued to apply the highest 

dumping margin contained in the 

Petition, 257.11 percent, as explained in 

the Preliminary Determination and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum.4

In accordance with the Preliminary 

Determination, we continue to grant GJY 

a separate rate because evidence on the 

record supports an absence of de jure 

and de facto government control.5

Hydro-Fluids Controls Limited (HFC), 

Songhai Flange Manufacturing Co., Ltd 

(Songhai), and Dongtai QB Stainless 

Steel Co., Ltd (Dongtai), were also 

selected as mandatory respondents, but 

withdrew from participation in this 

investigation and did not respond to 

requests for information.6 Thus, we 

continue to find that HFC, Songhai, and 

Dongtai did not demonstrate that they 

are eligible for a separate rate and are 

part of the China-wide entity. We also 

continue to find that, in addition to the 

mandatory respondents that did not 

respond to our requests for information, 

Commerce did not receive timely 

responses to its Quantity and Value 

(Q&V) questionnaire from numerous 

Chinese exporters and/or producers of 

the merchandise under consideration 

that were named in the Petition and to 

whom Commerce issued Q&V 

questionnaires.7 Because these 

companies, which comprise part of the 

China-wide entity, failed to submit the 

requested Q&V information, we 

determine that the China-wide entity 

did not cooperate to the best of its 

ability. Therefore, for this final 

determination, Commerce continues to 

find that the China-wide entity failed to 

provide necessary information, 

withheld information requested by 

Commerce, failed to provide 

information in a timely manner, and 

significantly impeded this proceeding 

by not submitting the requested 

information. As a result, Commerce 

continues to find that use of facts 

available, with an adverse inference, is 

warranted in determining the rate of the 

China-wide entity, pursuant to sections 

776(a)(1), (a)(2)(A)–(C), and 776(b) of the 

Act.8

China-Wide Rate 

In selecting the AFA rate for the 

China-wide entity, Commerce’s practice 

is to select a rate that is sufficiently 

adverse to ensure that the uncooperative 

party does not obtain a more favorable 

result by failing to cooperate than if it 

had fully cooperated. Specifically, it is 

Commerce’s practice to select, as an 

AFA rate, the higher of: (a) the highest 

dumping margin alleged in the petition; 

or, (b) the highest calculated dumping 

margin of any respondent in the 

investigation. As AFA, Commerce has 

assigned to the China-wide entity the 

rate of 257.11 percent, which is the 

highest dumping margin alleged in the 

Petition. 

Combination Rates 

In the Initiation Notice, Commerce 

stated that it would calculate producer/ 

exporter combination rates for the 

respondents that are eligible for a 

separate rate in this investigation.9

Because Commerce continues to use 

facts otherwise available with an 

adverse inference in determining the 

rate for the only respondent that 

demonstrated eligibility for a separate 

rate in this investigation, GJY, 

Commerce did not calculate producer/ 

exporter combination rates for that 

company. 

Final Determination 

The final weighted-average dumping 

margins are as follows: 

Exporter/producer 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margins 

(percent) 

Shanxi Guanjiaying Flange Forging Group Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................... 257.11 

China-wide Entity ................................................................................................................................................................................. 257.11 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Notices 26961 

10See Countervailing Duty Investigation of 

Stainless Steel Flanges from the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Affirmative Determination, 83 FR 

15790 (April 12, 2018); see also, e.g., Circular 

Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from Pakistan: 

Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final 

Determination and Extension of Provisional 

Measures, 81 FR 36867 (June 8, 2016) and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum 

at 13. 

Disclosure 

Normally, Commerce discloses to 

interested parties the calculations 

performed in connection with a final 

determination within five days of its 

public announcement or, if there is no 

public announcement, within five days 

of the date of publication of this notice 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). 

However, because Commerce applied 

adverse facts available to the 

individually examined company 

participating in this investigation, in 

accordance with section 776 of the Act, 

and the applied adverse facts available 

rate is based solely on the Petition, there 

are no calculations to disclose. 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce will 

instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend 

liquidation of all appropriate entries of 

stainless steel flanges from China, as 

described in the Appendix to this 

notice, which were entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after March 28, 

2018, the date of publication in the 

Federal Register of the affirmative 

Preliminary Determination. 

Further, pursuant to section 

735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, Commerce 

will also instruct CBP to collect a cash 

deposit as follows: (1) The rate for the 

exporters listed in the chart above will 

be the rate we have determined in this 

final determination; (2) for all Chinese 

exporters of subject merchandise which 

have not received their own rate, the 

cash-deposit rate will be the China-wide 

rate; and (3) for all non-Chinese 

exporters of subject merchandise which 

have not received their own rate, the 

cash-deposit rate will be the rate 

applicable to the Chinese exporter/ 

producer combination that supplied that 

non-Chinese exporter. These 

suspension-of-liquidation instructions 

will remain in effect until further notice. 

Because there has been no 

demonstration that an adjustment for 

domestic subsidies is warranted, 

Commerce has not made any such 

adjustment to the rate assigned to GJY 

or the China-wide entity. Additionally, 

Commerce is making no adjustments for 

export subsidies to the antidumping 

cash deposit rate in this investigation 

because we have made no findings in 

the companion countervailing duty 

investigation that any of the programs 

are export subsidies.10

International Trade Commission 

Notification 

In accordance with section 735(d) of 

the Act, we will notify the U.S. 

International Trade Commission (ITC) of 

the final affirmative determination of 

sales at LTFV. Because the final 

determination in this proceeding is 

affirmative, in accordance with section 

735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will make 

its final determination as to whether the 

domestic industry in the United States 

is materially injured, or threatened with 

material injury, by reason of imports of 

stainless steel flanges from China no 

later than 45 days after this final 

determination. If the ITC determines 

that material injury, or threat of material 

injury, does not exist, the proceeding 

will be terminated and all cash deposits 

will be refunded. If the ITC determines 

that such injury does exist, Commerce 

will issue an antidumping duty order 

directing CBP to assess, upon further 

instruction by Commerce, antidumping 

duties on all imports of the merchandise 

under consideration entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the effective 

date of the suspension of liquidation. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Orders 

This notice serves as a reminder to 

parties subject to an administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). 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 the terms of an APO is 

a sanctionable violation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This determination is issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 

CFR 351.210(c). 

Dated: June 4, 2018. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

Scope of the Investigation 

The products covered by this investigation 

are certain forged stainless steel flanges, 

whether unfinished, semi-finished, or 

finished (certain forged stainless steel 

flanges). Certain forged stainless steel flanges 

are generally manufactured to, but not 

limited to, the material specification of 

ASTM/ASME A/SA182 or comparable 

domestic or foreign specifications. Certain 

forged stainless steel flanges are made in 

various grades such as, but not limited to, 

304, 304L, 316, and 316L (or combinations 

thereof). The term ‘‘stainless steel’’ used in 

this scope refers to an alloy steel containing, 

by actual weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon 

and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with 

or without other elements. 

Unfinished stainless steel flanges possess 

the approximate shape of finished stainless 

steel flanges and have not yet been machined 

to final specification after the initial forging 

or like operations. These machining 

processes may include, but are not limited to, 

boring, facing, spot facing, drilling, tapering, 

threading, beveling, heating, or compressing. 

Semi-finished stainless steel flanges are 

unfinished stainless steel flanges that have 

undergone some machining processes. 

The scope includes six general types of 

flanges. They are: (1) Weld neck, generally 

used in butt-weld line connection; (2) 

threaded, generally used for threaded line 

connections; (3) slip-on, generally used to 

slide over pipe; (4) lap joint, generally used 

with stub-ends/butt-weld line connections; 

(5) socket weld, generally used to fit pipe 

into a machine recession; and (6) blind, 

generally used to seal off a line. The sizes 

and descriptions of the flanges within the 

scope include all pressure classes of ASME 

B16.5 and range from one-half inch to 

twenty-four inches nominal pipe size. 

Specifically excluded from the scope of this 

investigation are cast stainless steel flanges. 

Cast stainless steel flanges generally are 

manufactured to specification ASTM A351. 

The country of origin for certain forged 

stainless steel flanges, whether unfinished, 

semi-finished, or finished is the country 

where the flange was forged. Subject 

merchandise includes stainless steel flanges 

as defined above that have been further 

processed in a third country. The processing 

includes, but is not limited to, boring, facing, 

spot facing, drilling, tapering, threading, 

beveling, heating, or compressing, and/or any 

other processing that would not otherwise 

remove the merchandise from the scope of 

the investigation if performed in the country 

of manufacture of the stainless steel flanges. 

Merchandise subject to the investigation is 

typically imported under headings 

7307.21.1000 and 7307.21.5000 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS). While HTSUS subheadings 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
26962 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Notices 

1See Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of 

Carbon and Alloy Steel from the People’s Republic 

of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Sales 

at Less-Than-Fair Value and Final Determination of 

Critical Circumstances, in Part, 83 FR 16322 (April 

16, 2018) (China Final); Certain Cold-Drawn 

Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from 

the Federal Republic of Germany: Final Affirmative 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 

FR 16326 (April 16, 2018) (Germany Final); Certain 

Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and 

Alloy Steel from India: Final Affirmative 

Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value, 83 

FR 16296 (April 16, 2018) (India Final); Certain 

Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and 

Alloy Steel from Italy: Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative 

Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part, 83 

FR 16289 (April 16, 2018) (Italy Final); Certain 

Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and 

Alloy Steel from the Republic of Korea: Final 

Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, Final Affirmative Determination of 

Critical Circumstances, 83 FR 16319 (April 16, 

2018) (Korea Final); Certain Cold-Drawn 

Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from 

Switzerland: Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value, 83 FR 16293 (April 16, 2018) 

(Switzerland Final). 

2See China Final, 83 FR at 16322; Italy Final, 83 

FR at 16290; and Korea Final, 83 FR at 16320. 

3See section 735(e) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.224(f). 

4See Goodluck’s letter, ‘‘Goodluck’s Final 

Determination Ministerial Error Comments: 

Antidumping Duty Investigation on Certain ColdDrawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy 

Steel from India (A–533–873),’’ dated April 17, 

2018 (Goodluck’s Allegation). 

5See Memorandum, ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 

Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India: 

Ministerial Error Allegation Memorandum,’’ dated 

May 16, 2018. 

6ArcelorMittal Tubular Products, Michigan 

Seamless Tube, LLC, Plymouth Tube Co. USA, PTC 

Alliance Corp., Webco Industries, Inc., and 

Zekelman Industries, Inc. (collectively, the 

petitioners). 

7See the petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Cold-Drawn 

Mechanical Tubing from Germany—Petitioners’ 

Ministerial Error Allegations Regarding BENTELER 

Steel/Tube GmbH,’’ dated April 23, 2018 

(Petitioners’ Allegation regarding Benteler); the 

petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing 

from Germany—Petitioners’ Ministerial Error 

Allegations Regarding Salzgitter Mannesmann Line 

Pipe GmbH and Salzgitter Mannesmann Precision 

GmbH,’’ dated April 23, 2018 (Petitioners’ 

Allegation regarding Salzgitter). 

8See Benteler’s letter, ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Investigation of Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 

Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from Germany: 

Reply to Ministerial Error Comments for the Final 

Determination,’’ dated April 30, 2018 (Benteler’s 

Rebuttal Comments). 

9See Memorandum, ‘‘Less-Than-Fair-Value 

Investigation of Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 

Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the Federal 

Republic of Germany: Ministerial Error Allegation 

Memorandum,’’ dated June 6, 2018. 

10See Benteler Rothrist’s letter, ‘‘Antidumping 

Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Drawn 

Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from 

Switzerland: Ministerial Error Comments for the 

Final Determination,’’ dated April 23, 2018 

(Benteler Rothrist’s Allegation). 

11See the petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Cold-Drawn 

Mechanical Tubing from Switzerland—Petitioners’ 

Response to Benteler Rothrist’s Ministerial Error 

Allegation,’’ dated April 30, 2018 (Petitioners’ 

Rebuttal Comments to Benteler Rothrist). 

12See the petitioners’ letter, ‘‘Cold-Drawn 

Mechanical Tubing from China—Petitioners’ 

Ministerial Error Allegations,’’ dated April 24, 2018 

(Petitioners’ China Allegation). 

13See Huacheng’s letter, ‘‘Cold-Drawn 

Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from 

and ASTM specifications are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope is 

dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12482 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–058, A–428–845, A–533–873, A–475– 

838, A–580–892, A–441–801] 

Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing 

of Carbon and Alloy Steel From the 

People’s Republic of China, the 

Federal Republic of Germany, India, 

Italy, the Republic of Korea, and 

Switzerland: Antidumping Duty 

Orders; and Amended Final 

Determinations of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value for the People’s Republic of 

China and Switzerland 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: Based on affirmative final 

determinations by the Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) and the 

International Trade Commission (the 

ITC), Commerce is issuing antidumping 

duty orders on certain cold-drawn 

mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy 

steel (cold-drawn mechanical tubing) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(China), the Federal Republic of 

Germany (Germany), India, Italy, the 

Republic of Korea (Korea), and 

Switzerland. In addition, Commerce is 

amending its final determination of 

sales at less than fair value (LTFV) for 

China and Switzerland as a result of 

ministerial errors. 

DATES: Applicable June 11, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Stolz at (202) 482–4474 or Keith Haynes 

at (202) 482–5139 (China), Frances 

Veith at (202) 482–4295 (Germany), 

Susan Pulongbarit at (202) 482–4031 or 

Omar Qureshi at (202) 482–5307 (India), 

Carrie Bethea at (202) 482–1491 (Italy), 

Annathea Cook at (202) 482–0250 

(Korea), and Laurel LaCivita at (202) 

482–4243 (Switzerland), AD/CVD 

Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In accordance with sections 735(a), 

735(d), and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 

351.210(c), Commerce published its 

affirmative final determinations in the 

LTFV investigations of cold-drawn 

mechanical tubing from China, 

Germany, India, Italy, Korea, and 

Switzerland on April 16, 2018.1 In 

addition, Commerce made affirmative 

determinations of critical circumstances 

with respect to China and Italy, in part, 

and with respect to Korea, pursuant to 

section 735(a)(3) of the Act, and 19 CFR 

351.206.2

Commerce received numerous 

ministerial error allegations and 

comments in the various investigations. 

A ministerial error is defined as an error 

in addition, subtraction, or other 

arithmetic function, clerical error 

resulting from inaccurate copying, 

duplication, or the like, and any other 

similar type of unintentional error 

which the Secretary considers 

ministerial.3

On April 17, 2018, Goodluck India 

Limited (Goodluck) alleged that 

Commerce made a ministerial error in 

the India Final.4 However, we find that 

the alleged error is methodological, 

rather than ministerial, in nature.5

On April 23, 2018, the petitioners 6

alleged that Commerce made certain 

ministerial errors in the Germany Final 

with respect to Benteler Steel/Tube 

GmbH (Benteler), Salzgitter 

Mannesmann Line Pipe GmbH 

(Salzgitter Line Pipe) and Salzgitter 

Mannesmann Precision GmbH 

(Salzgitter Precision).7 On April 30, 

2018, Benteler submitted rebuttal 

comments to the petitioners’ allegation.8

Neither Salzgitter Line Pipe nor 

Salzgitter Precision submitted rebuttal 

comments. However, we find that the 

alleged errors regarding our Final 

Determination with respect to Benteler’s 

margin calculation and our treatment of 

Salzgitter Line Pipe, Salzgitter 

Precision, or any other Salzgitter 

company are methodological, rather 

than ministerial, in nature.9

On April 23, 2018, Benteler Rothrist 

AG (Benteler Rothrist) alleged that 

Commerce made certain ministerial 

errors in the Switzerland Final.10 On 

April 30, 2018, the petitioners 

submitted rebuttal comments to 

Benteler Rothrist’s allegation.11 See the 

‘‘Amendment to Switzerland Final’’ 

section below for further information. 

On April 24, 2018, the petitioners 

alleged that Commerce made certain 

ministerial errors in the China Final 

with respect to Zhangjiagang Huacheng 

Import & Export Co., Ltd. (Huacheng).12

On April 30, 2018, Huacheng submitted 

rebuttal comments to the petitioners’ 

allegation.13 See the ‘‘Amendment to 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES