AD/CV Notices: Graphite Electrodes, Paper, Violet Pigment, Barium Chloride
Graphite Electrodes. The International Trade Administration has rescinded its new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on small diameter graphite electrodes from China for Xuzhou Jianglong Carbon Products Co. Ltd. because this company is affiliated with an entity that had prior shipments of subject goods for consumption in the U.S. and did not request a new shipper review within one year of those shipments. As a result, effective Oct. 16, the ITA will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to discontinue the option of posting a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit for entries of subject goods by Jianglong and cash deposits at the China-wide rate of 159.64 percent will be required for subject goods by Jianglong that are entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after Oct. 16.
Supercalendered Paper. The ITA has made an affirmative final countervailing duty determination on supercalendered paper from Canada, with countervailable subsidies of 17.87 to 20.18 percent. As a result, the ITA will order the continuation of the suspension of liquidation and require CV cash deposits at the final subsidy rates for the mandatory respondents and all other producers and exporters not selected for investigation. However, if the International Trade Commission issues a negative CV injury determination, the investigations will be terminated, no producers or exporters will be subject to future CV cash deposits, and all cash deposits already collected will be refunded.
Violet Pigment. In its sunset review of the AD and CV duty orders on carbazole violet pigment 23 from China and/or India, the ITC has determined that revocation of these orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. As a result, these orders will remain in place for five years.
Barium Chloride. In its sunset review of the AD duty order on barium chloride from China, the ITC has determined that revocation of this order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. As a result, this order will remain in place for five years.