This page was printed from https://geosyntheticsmagazine.com

Commerce Dept. rules in geogrid case

January 12th, 2017 / By: / Industry News, News

Summary                                                                                                      

The U.S. Department of Commerce has determined that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of certain biaxial integral geogrid products from the People’s Republic of China. The period of investigation is Jan. 1, 2015, through Dec. 31, 2015; with an effective date of Jan. 11, 2017.

Background

The petitioner in this investigation is Tensar Corp. In addition to the government of China, the mandatory respondents in this investigation are BOSTD Geosynthetics Qingdao Ltd. and its crossed-owned company Beijing Orient Science & Technology Development Co. Ltd., and Taian Modern Plastic Co. Ltd.

The Commerce Department published its Preliminary Determination on June 24, 2016, and its Amended Preliminary Determination on July 26, 2016.  A complete summary of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, can be found in the “Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Biaxial Integral Geogrid Products from the People’s Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination,” which is dated concurrently with and adopted by this notice.

The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is available electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”): https://access.trade.gov;  http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn

The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version are identical in content.

Methodology                                                                                            

The U.S. Department of Commerce conducted this countervailing duty investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we determine that there is a subsidy (i.e., a financial contribution by an “authority” that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient) and that the subsidy is specific. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Issues and Decisions Memo.

Scope of the investigation

The products covered by this investigation are geogrids from the PRC. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix II.

Analysis of subsidy programs and comments received

All issues raised in the comments filed by interested parties to this proceeding are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised by interested parties and responded to by the Department in the Issues and Decisions Memo are attached at Appendix II to this notice.

Use of adverse facts available

For purposes of this final determination, we relied, in part, on facts available and, because certain respondents did not act to the best of their ability to respond to the Department’s requests for information, we drew an adverse inference, where appropriate, in selecting from among the facts otherwise available.  A full discussion of our decision to rely on adverse facts available is presented in the “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” section of the Issues and Decisions Memo.

Final determination

In accordance with sections 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we calculated an estimated countervailable subsidy rate for each producer/exporter of the subject merchandise individually investigated.

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments are moderated and will show up after being approved.