New York - Miami - Los Angeles Monday, February 18, 2019
  You are here:  Newsletter
Newsletters Minimize



Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Large Diameter Welded Pipe from Canada, Greece, India, the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and the Republic of Turkey
Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz, Silverman & Klestadt LLP

 I.  Type of Action: Antidumping Duty (“AD”): Canada, Greece, India, the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Turkey; Countervailing Duty (“CVD”): India, the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Turkey.

II.  Product: The merchandise covered by this investigation is welded carbon and alloy steel pipe, more than 406.4 mm (16 inches) in nominal diameter (large diameter welded pipe), regardless of wall thickness, length, surface finish, grade, end finish, or stenciling. Large diameter welded pipe may be used to transport oil, gas, slurry, steam, or other liquids. It may also be used for structural purposes, including piling. Specifically not included is large diameter welded pipe produced specifically to specifications of the American Water Works Association ("AWWA") for water and sewage pipe.

Large diameter welded pipe used to transport oil, gas, or natural gas liquids is normally produced to the American Petroleum Institute ("API'') specification SL. Large diameter welded pipe may also be produced to American Society for Testing and Materials ("ASTM") standards A500, A252, or A53. Large diameter welded pipe can be produced to comparable foreign specifications or to proprietary grades, or can be non-graded material. All pipe meeting the physical description set forth above is covered by the scope of these investigations, whether or not produced according to a particular standard.

Subject merchandise also includes large diameter welded pipe that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to coating, painting, notching, beveling, cutting, punching, welding, 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 in-scope large diameter welded pipe.

The large diameter welded pipe that is subject to these investigations is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings: 7305.11.1030, 7305.11.1060, 7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 7305.12.1060, 7305.12.5000, 7305.19.1030, 7305.19.1060, 7305.19.5000, 7305.31.4000, 7305.31.6090, 7305.39.1000, and 7305.39.5000.

While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this investigation is dispositive.

III.  HTS classifications: Large diameter welded pipe is currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule ("HTS") subheadings: 7305.11.1030, 7305.11.1060, 7305.11.5000, 7305.12.1030, 7305.12.1060, 7305.12.5000, 7305.19.1030, 7305.19.l 060, 7305.19.5000, 7305.31.4000, 7305.31.6090, 7305.39.1000 and 7305.39.5000.

IV.  Date of Filing: January 17, 2018

V.  Petitioners: Berg Steel Pipe Corp.; Berg Spiral Pipe Corp.; Dura-Bond Industries; Stupp Corporation; American Cast Iron Pipe Company; and Skyline Steel

VI.  Foreign Producers/Exporters.  Please contact our office for a list filed with the petition.

VII.  US Importers named.   Please contact our office for a list filed with the petition.

VIII.  Alleged Dumping Margin (No CVD Rates listed):

Canada: 53.01%;
Greece: 25.69%;
India: 50.55%;
The Republic of Korea: 23.52%;
The People’s Republic of China: 138.61%;
The Republic of Turkey: 27.83%.

IX.  Comments:

A.  Projected date of ITC Preliminary Conference: February 7, 2018. Please contact our office for a complete projected schedule for the AD investigation.

B.  The earliest theoretical date for retroactive suspension of liquidation for the antidumping duty is March 28, 2018; for countervailing duty is February 6, 2018. Please contact our office for a complete projected schedule for the CVD Investigation.

C.  Volume and Value of Imports:  Please contact our office for a summary of the data filed with the petition.

D.  List of Alleged Subsidy Programs: Please contact our office for a summary of the data filed with the petition.

If you have questions regarding how this investigation may impact future imports of scope merchandise, or whether a particular product is within the scope of the investigation, please contact one of our attorneys.

FTC Updates Textile Rules to Eliminate Obsolete Requirement
Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission is updating the Rules and Regulations under the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act (Textile Rules).

The Textile Rules require marketers to place a label on certain textile products to disclose certain information, such as the name under which the manufacturer or other responsible company does business.

In June 2017, the Commission sought comments on proposed amendments to the Rules to reduce compliance costs. Based on comments received, the Commission is eliminating an obsolete provision requiring that house word trademark owners furnish the agency with a copy of the mark’s United States Patent and Trademark Office registration before using the mark on labels.

The Commission voted to approve the Federal Register Notice announcing final amendments to the Textile Rules was 2-0. (FTC File No. P948404; the staff contact is Jock Chung, Bureau of Consumer Protection, 202-326-2984)

Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D. on New Policy Steps for Strengthening Public Warning and Notification of Recalls - Food & Drug Administration

Americans depend on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to help ensure that the products they buy are safe. Last month, I committed the agency to further improve our recall processes because I believe that consumers should have actionable information for protecting themselves from any FDA-regulated, recalled product.

Recalls are an important safety tool. The FDA works with companies to get potentially unsafe products out of the marketplace as quickly and efficiently as possible. When we learn about a product in the marketplace that may be unsafe, the FDA must act quickly to keep people from getting sick or being harmed.

Today we published a draft guidance that better describes the FDA’s policy on public warning and notification of recalled products as part of our effort to ensure better, more timely information reaches consumers. Although we often hear the most about recalled food, this guidance also covers other FDA-regulated products including drugs, medical devices and cosmetics.

Specifically, the draft guidance outlines circumstances when a company should issue a public warning about a recall, describes the general timeline for companies to issue such a warning, discusses what information should be included in a public warning, and describes situations where the FDA may take action to issue its own public warning should a company’s warning be deemed insufficient. The draft guidance also describes the FDA’s policy for moving forward with posting recalls to FDA’s Enforcement Report before a final health risk determination is made. The FDA’s Enforcement Report is a listing of all recalls monitored by the FDA. You can read more about the changes the FDA made to its Enforcement Report in today’s blog.

The draft guidance is a key step to enhance the recall process. It gives industry clear direction on how to navigate and work with the FDA to make sure that recalls are communicated promptly. Ultimately, it will better empower consumers by providing more timely and more accurate information on recalled products.

Furthermore, we are also developing a new FDA policy on what information the FDA will make available to help the public to identify a hazardous recalled food. With most products that the FDA regulates, consumers can typically identify a recalled product from the information a company provides about the packaging or brand name information.

As part of overseeing thousands of recalls every year, the agency helps provide descriptions, lot codes and photographs to help consumers and others, such as stores identify affected products. The FDA also helps provide some geographic or retail-related information for many recalls. But in some situations, identifying additional information – such as specific stores that may have sold a potentially unsafe, recalled food – may help. As part of these efforts, we’re planning to announce a new approach to the release of recall information this year. In the meantime, the FDA can and will publicize this kind of information if it is necessary to effectuate a recall.

Making sure the FDA has effective recall practices in place, and that we take immediate action to address unsafe products, are high priorities of mine. Our recall authorities – and how we deploy them – are a cornerstone of our vital, consumer protection mission and I take these obligations very seriously.

The draft guidance issued today is just the first in a series of policy steps we’ll take this year as part of a broader action plan to further improve our oversight of food safety and how we help implement the recall process.

We all know that hazardous recalled products can have a devastating impact on human lives. We’re committed to making sure that recalls are initiated, overseen, and completed promptly and effectively to best protect consumers; and we will use all the tools at our disposal to carry through on this commitment.

The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, protects the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, and security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices. The agency also is responsible for the safety and security of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, dietary supplements, products that give off electronic radiation, and for regulating tobacco products.

OTEXA: Announcements - Office of Textile

The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that there is a reasonable indication that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of common alloy aluminum sheet from China that are allegedly subsidized and sold in the United States at less than fair value.

Chairman Rhonda K. Schmidtlein, Vice Chairman David S. Johanson, and Commissioners Irving A. Williamson and Meredith M. Broadbent voted in the affirmative.

As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determinations, the U.S. Department of Commerce will continue with its antidumping and countervailing duty investigations, with its preliminary countervailing duty determination due on or about February 1, 2018, and its antidumping duty determinations due on or about April 17, 2018.

The Commission’s public report Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from China (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-591 and 731-TA-1399 (Preliminary), USITC Publication 4757, January 2018) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the investigations.

The report will be available after February 13, 2018; when available, it may be accessed on the USITC website at:


Washington, DC 20436


Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from China
Investigation Nos: 701-TA-591 and 731-TA-1399 (Preliminary)

Product Description: Common alloy aluminum sheet (CAAS) is a thin flat-rolled aluminum product. It has a thickness of 6.3 mm or less, but greater than 0.2 mm, in coils or cut-to-length, regardless of width. CAAS within the scope of these investigations include both not clad and multi-alloy clad aluminum sheet. Not clad aluminum can be produced from a 1XXX, 3XXX, or 5XXX series alloy, while multi-alloy clad CAAS is produced using a 3XXX series alloy core, to which cladding layers are applied to either one or both sides of the core. CAAS in this instance specifically excludes can stock used in the manufacturing of aluminum beverage cans, lids, and tabs for such cans. CAAS is used in applications such as building and construction, electrical, infrastructure, marine, and transportation, among others.

Status of Proceedings:

1. Type of investigation: Preliminary phase antidumping duty and countervailing duty investigations.
2. Petitioners: Self-initiated by the U.S. Department of Commerce (Washington, D.C.).
3. USITC Institution Date: Friday, December 01, 2017.
4. USITC Conference Date: Thursday, December 21, 2017.
5. USITC Vote Date: Friday, January 12, 2018.
6. USITC Notification to Commerce Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2018.

U.S. Industry in 2016:

1. Number of U.S. producers: 9.
2. Location of producers’ plants: Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
3. Production and related workers: 5,472.
4. U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments: $2.9 billion.
5. Apparent U.S. consumption: $5.0 billion.
6. Ratio of subject imports to apparent U.S. consumption: 13.1 percent.

U.S. Imports in 2016:

1. Subject imports: $656.9 million.
2. Nonsubject imports: $1.5 billion.
3. Leading import sources: China, Canada, Bahrain, Germany
  Copyright © 1997-2018 C-Air Privacy Statement | Terms Of Use