Graphite Electrodes from China – DGAD Initiates MTR Investigation on Complaint of Alloy Steel Producers

·         Users say that Dumping has Stopped, Downstream Industry is Hurt

·         $278 to $922 per tonne of Anti-dumping Duty on Graphic Electrodes Imposed on 13 Feb 2015 on Complaint of HEG and Graphite India

[Initiation Notification - Case no. (MTR) 2/2018 -(Mid Term Review Investigation) dated 4 April 2018]

Sub: - Initiation of Mid-term Review (MTR) investigation with regard to the anti- dumping duties in force on the imports of Graphite Electrodes of all diameters originating in or exported from China PR.

1. No. 7/13/2018-DGAD: Whereas having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as amended from time to time, (hereinafter referred to as Act) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, as amended from time to time, (hereinafter referred to as Rules), the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as Authority), notified its final findings vide Notification No. 14/02/2013-DGAD dated 19th November 2014 and recommended imposition of definitive anti-dumping duty on import of “Graphite Electrodes of all diameters” (hereinafter referred to as “subject goods” or “ the product under consideration”) originating in or exported from China PR and the definitive anti-dumping duty was imposed by the Central Government vide Customs Notification No. 04/2015 dated 13th February 2015.

A. Request for Initiation of Mid Term Review

2. Alloy Steel Producers Association of India (“ASPA”) (hereinafter referred to as “the applicant”) an association of importers/users of the subject goods, has submitted an application requesting for initiation of a review of the anti-dumping duties imposed on the imports of the subject goods from the subject countries in accordance with section

9A of the Customs Tariff Act 1975 read with Rule 23 of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995. They have claimed that the circumstances that were prevalent during the period of investigation of the original investigation have changed significantly leading to a situation where the existing antidumping duties are no longer warranted.

B. Grounds for Review

3. An anti-dumping investigation on imports of the subject goods was initiated vide Notification. No.14/02/2013- DGAD dated 20th May, 2013 on the basis of an application filed by M/s HEG Ltd. and M/s Graphite India Ltd (hereinafter collectively referred as “Domestic Industry”).

4. The Applicant has submitted that:

i.       The economic performance of the domestic industry in terms of revenue, profits and return on capital employed (ROCE) has improved significantly.

ii.      China PR was one of the major exporting countries of the subject goods to India.

However, in the recent years, the Government of China PR has shut down many industrial plants producing the subject goods on account of environmental concerns.

iii.     The Domestic Industry has been exporting significant volumes of the subject goods in the last few years and is neglecting the demands of the Indian market.

iv.     That the domestic industry is not suffering injury any longer and as a consequence, a need for reviewing the current duties has arisen.

C. Product under Consideration and Like Article

5. The product under consideration for the purpose of present investigation is “Graphite Electrodes of all diameters” from China PR. The main function of Graphite Electrodes is to be used for melting of steel by passing electric current into the charge fed into the furnaces. This method of steel making is also known as secondary steel making. Graphite Electrodes are used in arc furnaces as current carrying conductors and are required to carry a very high rate of power feed. Graphite electrodes can be broadly categorized as Ultra High Power (UHP) and others which include the High Power Grade (HPG) and Normal Power Grade (NPG). Accordingly, they are required to have properties capable for taking such high current and power feeds.

6. The product under consideration is classified under Customs Tariff Heading 8545 and are primarily imported under tariff item number 85451100 and 85451900 of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975. The customs classification is indicative only and is in no way binding on the scope of the present investigation.

7. The applicants have claimed that the subject goods being produced by the domestic industry are similar to the subject goods being imported into India. The applicants have claimed that PUC produced by the applicants and imported from the subject country are having comparable characteristics in terms of parameters such as physical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & uses, product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff classification of the goods. The two are technically and commercially substitutable and hence should be treated as ‘like article’ under the Rules. Therefore, for the purpose of the present investigation, the subject goods produced by the applicants in India are being treated as ‘like article’ to the subject goods being imported from the subject country.

D. Country Involved

8. The country involved in the present investigation is China PR.

E. Initiation

9. Sub Rule (1) and (1A) of Rule 23 of the Anti-dumping Rules, as amended vide Customs Notification No. 15/2011 dated 1st March 2011, inter alia, reads as follows:

(1) Any anti-dumping duty imposed under the provision of section 9A of the Act, shall remain in force, so long as and to the extent necessary, to counteract dumping, which is causing injury.

(1A) The Designated Authority shall review the need for the continued imposition of any anti-dumping duty, where warranted, on its own initiative or upon request by any interested party who submits positive information substantiating the need for such review, and a reasonable period of time has elapsed since the imposition of the definitive anti-dumping duty and upon such review, the designated authority shall recommend to the Central Government for its withdrawal, where it comes to a conclusion that injury to the domestic industry is not likely to recur, if the said antidumping duty is removed or varied and therefore no longer warranted.

10. In terms of aforesaid rules, the Authority shall review from time to time, the need for continued imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty and if it is satisfied on the basis of information received by it that there is no justification for continued imposition of such duty, the Authority may recommend to the Central Government for its withdrawal.

11. On the basis of information made available by the aforementioned Applicant before the Authority, the Authority considers it prima facie appropriate to initiate a mid-term review of the anti-dumping duties imposed on the imports of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries.

F. Procedure

12. Having regard to the information provided by the Applicant indicating changed circumstances necessitating a review of the measure in force, the Designated Authority now considers that it is appropriate to initiate a mid-term review of the final findings notified vide Notification No. 14/02/2013-DGAD dated 19th  November 2014 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary Part I, Section I and the definitive duties imposed by the Central Government vide Customs Notification No. 04/2015 dated 13th  February provisions of Section 9(A) of Customs Tariff (Amendment) Act 1995 read with Rule 23 of the Rules supra to review the need for continued imposition of the anti-dumping duties. The review will cover all aspects of Notification No.14/02/2013-DGAD dated 19th  November 2014.

G. Period of Investigation

13. The period of investigation (POI) for the present investigation is from April, 2017 to March, 2018. The injury investigation period will, however, cover the periods April 2014-March 2015, April 2015-March 2016, April 2016-March 2017 and the POI.

H. Submission of Information

14. The known exporters in the subject country and its Government through its Embassies in India, importers and users in India known to be concerned with the subject goods and the domestic industry are being informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant information in the form and manner prescribed within the time limit set out below.

15. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the form and manner prescribed within the time limit set out below. The information/submissions may be submitted to:

The Designated Authority,

Directorate General of Anti-Dumping & Allied Duties, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of Commerce, Government of India

4th Floor, Jeevan Tara Building, 5, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001

16. Any party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to make a non-confidential version of the same available to the other parties.

I. Time Limit

17. Any information relating to the present investigation should be sent in writing so as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above not later than forty days (40 days) from the date of the publication of initiation notification. If no information is received within the prescribed time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record in accordance with the AD Rules.

18. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest) in the instant matter and file their questionnaire responses and offer their comments to the domestic industry’s application within forty days (40 days) from the date of the publication of initiation notification. The information must be submitted in hard copies as well as in soft copies.

J. Submission of Information on Confidential Basis

19. The parties making any submission (including Appendices/Annexure attached thereto), before the authority including questionnaire response, are required to file the same in two separate sets, in case "confidentiality" is claimed on any part thereof:

i.       one set marked as Confidential (with title, number of pages, index, etc.), and

ii.      the other set marked as Non-Confidential (with title, number of pages, index, etc.).

20. The “confidential” or “non-confidential” submissions must be clearly marked as “confidential” or “non-confidential” at the top of each page. Any submission made without such marking shall be treated as non-confidential by the Authority and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to inspect such submissions. Soft copies of both the versions will also be required to be submitted, along with the hard copies, in five (5) sets of each.

21. The confidential version shall contain all information which is by nature confidential and/or other information which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. For information which are claimed to be confidential by nature or the information on which confidentiality is claimed because of other reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause statement along with the supplied information as to why such information cannot be disclosed.

22. The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (in case indexation is not feasible) and summarized depending upon the information on which confidentiality is claimed. The non-confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information furnished on confidential basis. However, in exceptional circumstances, party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to summary, and a statement of reasons why summarization is not possible must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.

23. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied that the request for confidentiality is not warranted or if the supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.

24. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or without good cause statement on the confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.

25. The Authority on being satisfied and accepting the need for confidentiality of the information provided, shall not disclose it to any party without specific authorization of the party providing such information.

K. Inspection of Public File

26. In terms of Rule 6(7) of the AD Rules, any interested party may inspect the public file containing non-confidential version of the evidence submitted by other interested parties.

L. Non-Cooperation

27. In case where an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.