Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India; Final Results of New Shipper Review

AGENCY:

Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY:

On August 3, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of new shipper review of certain forged stainless steel flanges from India. The review covers one manufacturer/exporter, Hilton Forge (Hilton). Although interested parties had an opportunity to comment on our preliminary results, we received no comments. The Department has not made any changes in its analysis following publication of the preliminary results. Therefore, the final results of review are unchanged from those presented in the preliminary results of review.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

October 28, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Fred Baker or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2924 and (202) 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On August 3, 2005, the Department published its preliminary results of new shipper review of certain forged stainless steel flanges from India. See Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India; Preliminary Results of New Shipper Review, 70 FR 44560 (August 3, 2005). No party submitted comments on the preliminary results.

Period of Review

The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2004, through July 31, 2004.

Scope of the Review

The products covered by this order 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 connection; 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 this order are cast stainless steel flanges. Cast stainless steel flanges generally are manufactured to specification ASTM A-351. The flanges subject to this order are currently classifiable under subheadings 7307.21.1000 and 7307.21.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS). Although the HTS 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 order.

Final Results of Review

We determine that a margin of 0.89 percent exists for Hilton for the period

February 1, 2004, through July 31, 2004.

Assessment

The Department will determine, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b). We have calculated importer-specific duty assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the examined sales for each importer. We will direct CBP to assess the resulting assessment rates against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise on each of the importer's entries during the review period. The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to the CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

Bonding is no longer permitted to fulfill security requirements for shipments from Hilton of stainless steel flanges from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these final results of new shipper review. The following cash-deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this new shipper review for all shipments of subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after the publication date as provided for by section 751(a)(1) and 751 (a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act):

• for subject merchandise manufactured and exported by Hilton the cash deposit rate shall be 0.89 percent;
• for subject merchandise exported by Hilton but not manufactured by Hilton the cash-deposit rate will continue to be the “all others” rate or the rate applicable to the manufacturer, if so established;
• the cash deposit rate for exporters who received a rate in a prior segment of the proceeding will continue to be the rate assigned in that segment of the proceeding;
• if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or in any previous segment of this proceeding, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be that established for the manufacturer in the most recent segment of these proceedings in which that manufacturer participated;
• if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review or in any previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will be 162.14 percent, the all others rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. (See Amended Final Determination and Antidumping Duty Order; Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges from India, 59 FR 5994 (February 9, 1994)).

These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review.

This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR § 351.402(f) 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.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR § 351.305. Timely written notification of 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 sanctionable violation.

We are issuing and publishing this new shipper review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of the Act.