Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, 17017-17021 [2012-7055]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
this notice, in accordance with section
351.224(b) of the Department’s
regulations.
In accordance with section
351.301(c)(3)(ii) of the Department’s
regulations, for the final results of this
administrative review, interested parties
may submit publicly available
information to value FOPs within 20
days after the date of publication of
these preliminary results. Interested
parties must provide the Department
with supporting documentation for the
publicly available information to value
each FOP. Pursuant to section
351.301(c)(1) of the Department’s
regulations, submissions of factual
information may be rebutted, however
the Department reminds that section
351.301(c)(1) of the Department’s
regulations permits new information
only insofar as it rebuts, clarifies, or
corrects information recently placed on
the record. The Department will not
accept the submission of additional,
alternative surrogate value information
submitted with rebuttal submissions,
where that information has not
previously been part of the review
record, pursuant to section 351.301(c)(1)
of the Department’s regulations.33
Additionally, for each piece of factual
information submitted with surrogate
value rebuttal comments, the interested
party must include an explanation to
indicate the record information the new
information is rebutting, clarifying, or
correcting.
Interested parties may submit case
briefs and/or written comments no later
than 30 days after the date of
publication of these preliminary results
of review.34 Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals
to written comments are limited to
issues raised in such briefs or
comments, and may be filed no later
than five days after the deadline for
filing case briefs.35 Parties who submit
case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this
proceeding are requested to submit with
each argument: (1) A statement of the
issue; (2) a brief summary of the
argument; and 3) a table of authorities.36
The Department will issue the final
results of this administrative review,
which will include the results of its
analysis of issues raised in any such
comments, within 120 days of
33 See Glycine from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final Rescission, in
Part, 72 FR 58809 (October 17, 2007) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 2.
34 See section 351.309(c)(ii) of the Department’s
regulations.
35 See section 351.309(d) of the Department’s
regulations.
36 See section 351.309(c) and (d) of the
Department’s regulations.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Mar 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
publication of these preliminary results,
pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Act.
Assessment Rates
Upon issuance of the final results, the
Department will determine, and CBP
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by these
reviews. The Department intends to
issue assessment instructions to CBP 15
days after the publication date of the
final results of this review. In
accordance with section 351.212(b)(1) of
the Department’s regulations, for Hubei
Xingfa, we calculated an exporter/
importer (or customer)-specific
assessment rate for the merchandise
subject to this review. Because Hubei
Xingfa reported reliable entered values,
we calculated importer (or customer)specific ad valorem rates by aggregating
the dumping margins calculated for all
U.S. sales to each importer (or customer)
and dividing this amount by the total
entered value of the sales to each
importer (or customer).37 Where an
importer (or customer)-specific ad
valorem rate is greater than de minimis,
we will apply the assessment rate to the
entered value of the importer’s/
customer’s entries during the POR.38
To determine whether the duty
assessment rates are de minimis, in
accordance with the requirement set
forth in section 351.106(c)(2) of the
Department’s regulations, we calculated
importer (or customer)-specific ad
valorem ratios based on the estimated
entered value. Where an importer (or
customer)-specific ad valorem rate is
zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP
to liquidate appropriate entries without
regard to antidumping duties.39
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this
administrative review for shipments of
subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date of the final results, as provided by
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For
Hubei Xingfa, the cash deposit rate will
be that established in the final results of
review (except, if the rate is zero or de
minimis, no cash deposit will be
required); (2) for previously investigated
or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters
not listed above that have separate rates,
the cash deposit rate will continue to be
the exporter-specific rate published for
37 See section 351.212(b)(1) of the Department’s
regulations.
38 Id.
39 See section 351.106(c)(2) of the Department’s
regulations.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17017
the most recent period; (3) for all PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the PRC-wide rate of 188.05 percent;
and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not
received their own rate, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the
PRC exporters that supplied that nonPRC exporter. These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification of Interested Parties
This notice also serves as a
preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility, under section
351.402(f) of the Department’s
regulations, to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping
duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this POR. 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 administrative review and this
notice are published in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act,
and section 351.221(b)(4) of the
Department’s regulations.
Dated: March 13, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–7060 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–974]
Certain Steel Wheels From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination, Final Affirmative
Critical Circumstances Determination
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) determines that
countervailable subsidies are being
provided to producers and exporters of
certain steel wheels (steel wheels) from
the People’s Republic of China (the
PRC). For information on the estimated
subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Suspension of
Liquidation’’ section of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Conniff (for the Centurion Companies)
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
17018
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices
at 202–482–1009, Robert Copyak (for the
Jingu Companies) at 202–482–2209, and
Kristen Johnson (for the Xingmin
Companies) at 202–482–4793, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 4014, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This investigation, which covers 28
programs, was initiated on April 19,
2011.1 The petitioners in this
investigation are Accuride Corporation
and Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc.
The respondents in this investigation
are: Jining Centurion Wheel
Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Centurion),2
Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co., Ltd.
(Xingmin),3 and Zhejiang Jingu
Company Limited (Zhejiang Jingu).4 The
Department initially, in addition to
Zhejiang Jingu, selected Jiangsu
Yuantong Auto Parts Co., Ltd.
(Yuantong) and Zhejiang Jinfei
Machinery Group Co. Ltd. (Zhejiang
Jinfei) to be mandatory respondents.
Yuantong and Zhejiang Jinfei, however,
submitted responses to the Department’s
shipment questionnaire in which each
company certified that it did not export
subject merchandise to the United
States during the period of investigation
(POI).5 We analyzed entry documents
obtained from U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) and found that the
documentation confirmed the nonshipment claims of Yuantong and
Zhejiang Jinfei.6
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Period of Investigation
The POI for which we are measuring
subsidies is January 1, 2010, through
December 31, 2010, which corresponds
1 See Certain Steel Wheels From the People’s
Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigation, 76 FR 23302 (April 26, 2011).
2 We use the term Centurion Companies to refer
collectively to Centurion and its cross-owned
affiliates under examination in this investigation.
3 We use the term Xingmin Companies to refer
collectively to Xingmin and its cross-owned
affiliates under examination in this investigation.
4 We use the term Jingu Companies to refer
collectively to Zhejiang Jingu and its cross-owned
affiliates under examination in this investigation.
5 See Yuantong’s and Zhejiang Jinfei’s Shipment
Questionnaire Responses (May 20, 2011). The
public version of each response and all other public
versions and public documents for this
investigation are available electronically via Import
Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Centralized Electronic Services System (IA
ACCESS), located in the Department’s Central
Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main
Commerce building.
6 See Memorandum to the File from John Conniff,
Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3,
regarding ‘‘Examination of Entry Documentation,’’
(August 29, 2011).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Mar 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
to the PRC’s most recently completed
fiscal year at the time we initiated this
investigation. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
Case History
The following events have occurred
since the Department published the
Preliminary Determination on
September 6, 2011.7 On September 1,
2011, petitioners submitted a critical
circumstances allegation. On September
2, 2011, we issued a fourth
supplemental questionnaire to the
Government of the People’s Republic of
China (GOC). On September 7, 2011,
petitioners filed new subsidy allegations
concerning land provided for less than
adequate remuneration to the Centurion
Companies and Jingu Companies. On
September 9, 2011, we issued to the
respondent companies a critical
circumstances questionnaire requesting
monthly volume and value data for
shipments of subject merchandise to the
United States. Also, on September 9,
2011, we received the GOC’s response to
the third supplemental questionnaire.
On September 21, 2011, the Xingmin
Companies filed a response to the
critical circumstances questionnaire. On
September 23, 2011, the GOC submitted
its fourth supplemental questionnaire
response. On September 26, 2011, the
Centurion Companies, Jingu Companies,
and Xiamen Sunrise Wheel Group Co.,
Ltd. (Sunrise) each filed a response to
the critical circumstances
questionnaire.8
On October 3, 2011, the GOC
submitted certifications conforming to
the formats provided for in the
Supplemental Interim Final Rule 9 to
replace those certifications it had
previously filed with the Department
that did not conform with the format
provided in the Interim Final Rule.10
On October 5, 2011, we determined
that the petitioners’ new subsidy
7 See Certain Steel Wheels from the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment
of Final Countervailing Duty Determination with
Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 76 FR
55012 (September 6, 2011) (Preliminary
Determination).
8 Sunrise, a Chinese producer of subject
merchandise, had requested to be designated as a
voluntary respondent. However, because we
determined that the Department had resources to
investigate only three companies, we did not
designate Sunrise as a voluntary respondent in this
investigation. See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR
at 55013.
9 Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Supplemental
Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 54697 (September 2,
2011) (Supplemental Interim Final Rule).
10 See Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Interim Final
Rule, 76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011) (Interim Final
Rule).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
allegations were untimely filed and
rejected the September 7, 2011,
submission.11 On October 6, 2011, the
GOC requested a hearing in this
investigation.
On November 2, 2011, we issued a
memorandum to the file regarding the
scope of the investigation. See
Memorandum to the File from Kristen
Johnson, Trade Analyst, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 3, regarding ‘‘Scope
of the Investigation,’’ (November 2,
2011). In the memorandum, we
explained that because the language of
the scope covers steel wheels ranging
from 18 to 24.5 inches in diameter
regardless of use, the Department
preliminarily determined in Steel
Wheels AD Preliminary
Determination 12 to add all of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) categories
suggested by CBP to the scope of the AD
and CVD investigations on steel wheels
from the PRC.
On November 18, 2011, we issued a
verification outline to the Xingmin
Companies. On November 23, the
Xingmin Companies filed additional
factual information. On November 28,
2011, the GOC submitted new factual
information. On December 2, 2011, the
Department issued letters to the
Xingmin Companies and the GOC
rejecting their additional factual
information submissions because those
submissions contained untimely filed
information. On December 2 and 5,
2011, the Xingmin Companies and the
GOC, respectively, re-filed their
additional factual submissions
excluding that information found by the
Department to be untimely. On
December 5 and 6, 2011, the GOC and
Xingmin Companies, respectively,
submitted comments disagreeing with
Department’s finding that their initial
additional factual information
submissions contained untimely
information. Also, on December 5 and 6,
2011, the Department conducted
verification of the questionnaire
responses submitted by the Xingmin
Companies.
On December 6, 2011, we issued a
post-preliminary questionnaire to all
interested parties regarding the scope of
the AD and CVD investigations on steel
11 See Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner,
Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, from Robert
Copyak, Senior Financial Analyst, regarding
‘‘Decision Memorandum Regarding Petitioners’
New Subsidy Allegations,’’ (October 5, 2011).
12 See Certain Steel Wheels from the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value,
Partial Affirmative Preliminary Determination of
Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final
Determination, 76 FR 67703 (November 2, 2011)
(Steel Wheels AD Preliminary Determination).
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices
wheels from the PRC.13 On December
13, 2011, petitioners, the Xingmin
Companies, Jingu Companies, and
Jiaxing Stone Wheel Co., Ltd.,14 each
submitted a post-preliminary
supplemental questionnaire response to
the Department. On December 22 and
23, 2011, Blackstone/OTR LLC and OTR
Wheel Engineering, Inc. (collectively,
Blackstone/OTR), a U.S. importer of the
subject merchandise, and petitioners,
respectively, submitted rebuttal
comments to the post-preliminary
supplemental questionnaire responses.
We issued the verification reports for
the Xingmin Companies on January 6,
2012. We issued the verification reports
for the Centurion Companies and the
GOC on January 30, 2012. We issued the
verification report for the Jingu
Companies on January 31, 2012.
On February 7, 2012, case briefs were
submitted by the GOC, Centurion
Companies, Jingu Companies, Xingmin
Companies, and Blackstone/OTR. A
rebuttal brief was filed by petitioners on
February 13, 2012. On February 22,
2012, the GOC notified the Department
that it was withdrawing its request for
a hearing in this investigation.
On March 2, 2012, we published the
Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination,15 in which the
Department discussed the arguments
made by petitioners.16 On March 6,
2012, case briefs were submitted by
interested parties concerning the
Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination and rebuttal briefs were
filed on March 9, 2012.
On March 6, 2012, the Department
rejected Blackstone/OTR’s February 7,
2012, case brief because it contained
new factual information. Blackstone/
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
13 See
Memorandum to the File from Kristen
Johnson, Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office
3, regarding ‘‘Post-Preliminary Supplemental
Questionnaire Issued to All Interested Parties,’’
(December 6, 2011).
14 A Chinese producer of steel wheels.
15 See Certain Steel Wheels from the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary Negative
Determination of Critical Circumstances, 77 FR
12812 (March 2, 2012) (Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination).
16 In the Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination, the Department stated the following:
Petitioners provided Census Bureau Data, which
they contend demonstrate that imports of subject
merchandise increased by more than 15 percent,
which is required to be considered ‘‘massive’’ under
section 351.206(h)(2) of the Department’s
regulations. Petitioners submit that, by volume,
imports increased approximately 48 percent from
510,174 wheels in the first quarter of 2011, to
753,604 wheels in the second quarter of 2010. Id.
at 3 and Exhibit 1. Petitioners also contend that, by
value, imports increased approximately 40 percent,
from $17,787,704 in the first quarter of 2011, to
$24,893,481 in the second quarter of 2010. Id.
See 77 FR at 12812. In discussing the second
quarter import data supplied by petitioners we
inadvertently referred to 2010 rather than 2011.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Mar 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
OTR re-filed is case brief excluding the
new factual information on March 8,
2012.
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this
investigation are steel wheels with a
wheel diameter of 18 to 24.5 inches.
Rims and discs for such wheels are
included, whether imported as an
assembly or separately. These products
are used with both tubed and tubeless
tires. Steel wheels, whether or not
attached to tires or axles, are included.
However, if the steel wheels are
imported as an assembly attached to
tires or axles, the tire or axle is not
covered by the scope. The scope
includes steel wheels, discs, and rims of
carbon and/or alloy composition and
clad wheels, discs, and rims when
carbon or alloy steel represents more
than fifty percent of the product by
weight. The scope includes wheels,
rims, and discs, whether coated or
uncoated, regardless of the type of
coating.
Imports of the subject merchandise
are provided for under the following
categories of the HTSUS: 8708.70.05.00,
8708.70.25.00, 8708.70.45.30, and
8708.70.60.30. Imports of the subject
merchandise may also enter under the
following categories of the HTSUS:
8406.90.4580, 8406.90.7500,
8420.99.9000, 8422.90.1100,
8422.90.2100, 8422.90.9120,
8422.90.9130, 8422.90.9160,
8422.90.9195, 8431.10.0010,
8431.10.0090, 8431.20.0000,
8431.31.0020, 8431.31.0040,
8431.31.0060, 8431.39.0010,
8431.39.0050, 8431.39.0070,
8431.39.0080, 8431.43.8060,
8431.49.1010, 8431.49.1060,
8431.49.1090, 8431.49.9030,
8431.49.9040, 8431.49.9085,
8432.90.0005, 8432.90.0015,
8432.90.0030, 8432.90.0080,
8433.90.1000, 8433.90.5020,
8433.90.5040, 8436.99.0020,
8436.99.0090, 8479.90.9440,
8479.90.9450, 8479.90.9496,
8487.90.0080, 8607.19.1200,
8607.19.1500, 8708.70.1500,
8708.70.3500, 8708.70.4560,
8708.70.6060, 8709.90.0000,
8710.00.0090, 8714.19.0030,
8714.19.0060, 8716.90.1000,
8716.90.5030, 8716.90.5060,
8803.20.0015, 8803.20.0030, and
8803.20.0060. These HTSUS numbers
are provided for convenience and
customs purposes only; the written
description of the scope is dispositive.
Injury Test
Because the PRC is a ‘‘Subsidies
Agreement Country’’ within the
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17019
meaning of section 701(b) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the
International Trade Commission (the
ITC) is required to determine whether
imports of the subject merchandise from
the PRC materially injure, or threaten
material injury to, a U.S. industry. On
May 20, 2011, the ITC published its
preliminary determination finding that
there is a reasonable indication that an
industry in the United States is
materially injured or threatened with
material injury by reason of imports
from China of certain steel wheels.17
Critical Circumstances
In the Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination, the
Department concluded that critical
circumstances do not exist with respect
to steel wheels from the PRC produced
and exported by the Jingu Companies,
the Centurion Companies, and the
Xingming Companies, in accordance
with section 703(e)(1) of the Act. See
Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination, 77 FR at 12813–12814.
However, in the Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination the
Department concluded that critical
circumstances exist for imports from
‘‘all other’’ exporters of steel wheels
from the PRC. Id. Our analysis of the
results of verification and the comments
submitted by interested parties has not
led us to change our findings from the
Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination. Therefore, in accordance
with section 705(a)(2) of the Act, we
continue to find that critical
circumstances exist with respect to
imports from ‘‘all other’’ exporters of
steel wheels from the PRC.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs submitted by parties to
this investigation are addressed in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum,
dated concurrently with this notice and
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
A list of the issues which parties raised,
and to which we have responded in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum, is
attached to this notice as an Appendix.
The Issues and Decision Memorandum
is a public document and is on file
electronically via Import
Administration’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).
Access to IA ACCESS is available in the
Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046
of the main Department of Commerce
building. In addition, a complete
17 See Certain Steel Wheels From China,
Investigation Nos. 701–TA–478 and 731–TA–1182
(Preliminary), 76 FR 29265 (May 20, 2011).
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
17020
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices
version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/
ia/. The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
version of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section
705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we have
calculated an individual rate for subject
merchandise produced and exported by
each company under investigation. We
determine the total estimated net
countervailable subsidy rates to be:
Net subsidy ad
valorem rate
(percent)
Producer/exporter
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Jining Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Centurion) and Jining CII Wheel Manufacture Co., Ltd. (Jining CII) (collectively
the Centurion Companies) ...............................................................................................................................................................
Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co., Ltd. (Xingmin) and Sino-tex (Longkou) Wheel Manufacturers Inc. (Sino-tex) (collectively, the
Xingmin Companies) ........................................................................................................................................................................
Zhejiang Jingu Company Limited (Zhejiang Jingu), Chengdu Jingu Wheel Co., Ltd. (Chengdu), Zhejiang Wheel World Industrial
Co., Ltd. (Zhejiang Wheel World), and Shanghai Yata Industrial Co., Ltd. (Shanghai Yata) (collectively the Jingu Companies)
All Others .............................................................................................................................................................................................
Section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act state
that for companies not investigated, we
will determine an all-others rate by
weighting the individual company
subsidy rate of each of the companies
investigated by each company’s exports
of the subject merchandise to the United
States. The all others rate may not
include zero and de minimis rates or
any rates based solely on the facts
available. In this investigation, all three
individual rates can be used to calculate
the all others rate. Therefore, we have
assigned the weighted-average of these
three individual rates to all other
producers/exporters of steel wheels
from the PRC.
As a result of our Preliminary
Determination and pursuant to section
703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to
suspend liquidation of all entries of
subject merchandise from the PRC
which were entered or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
September 6, 2011, the date of the
publication of the Preliminary
Determination in the Federal Register.
Subsequently, as a result of our
Preliminary Critical Circumstances
Determination, we instructed CBP to
suspend liquidation of all entries of
subject merchandise from ‘‘all other’’
exporters of steel wheels from the PRC
which were entered or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
June 8, 2011, which is 90 days prior to
the date of publication in the Federal
Register of the Preliminary
Determination.
In accordance with section 703(d) of
the Act, we issued instructions to CBP
to discontinue the suspension of
liquidation for CVD purposes for subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, on or after January 4,
2012, but to continue the suspension of
liquidation of all entries from
September 6, 2011, through January 3,
2012.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Mar 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
We will issue a CVD order and
reinstate the suspension of liquidation
under section 706(a) of the Act if the
ITC issues a final affirmative injury
determination, and will require a cash
deposit of estimated CVDs for such
entries of merchandise in the amounts
indicated above. If the ITC determines
that material injury, or threat of material
injury, does not exist, this proceeding
will be terminated and all estimated
duties deposited or securities posted as
a result of the suspension of liquidation
will be refunded or canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of
the Act, we will notify the ITC of our
determination. In addition, we are
making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary
information related to this investigation.
We will allow the ITC access to all
privileged and business proprietary
information in our files, provided the
ITC confirms that it will not disclose
such information, either publicly or
under an administrative protective order
(APO), without the written consent of
the Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary
Information
In the event that the ITC issues a final
negative injury determination, this
notice will serve as the only reminder
to parties subject to an APO of their
responsibility concerning the
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the 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 violation which is subject to
sanction.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25.66
32.62
38.32
34.55
This determination is published
pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: March 16, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix
List of Comments and Issues in the Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1: Application of CVD Law to NonMarket Economies (NMEs)
Comment 2: Application of CVD Law to
NMEs Results in Double-Counting
Comment 3: Whether the Burden of Proving
Double-Counting Lies With Respondents
Comment 4: Proper ‘‘Cut-Off’’ Date To Be
Applied in the Investigation
Comment 5: Whether the Department’s
Examination of Additional Subsidy
Program Was Lawful
Comment 6: Whether It Was Appropriate for
the Department To Reject the Xingmin
Companies’ Factual Information
Comment 7: Whether It Was Appropriate for
the Department To Reject Centurion
Companies’ Factual Information
Comment 8: Whether Certain Hot-Rolled
Steel (HRS) Producers Constitute
Government Authorities That Provide a
Financial Contribution
Comment 9: Whether Purchases of HRS From
Domestic Trading Companies Constituted a
Financial Contribution
Comment 10: Whether the GOC Acted to the
Best of Its Ability To Provide Information
Regarding the Ownership Status of HRS
Producers
Comment 11: The Extent To Which Chinese
Communist Party (CCP) Membership is
Relevant in Determining Whether HRS
Producers Are Government Authorities
Capable of Providing a Financial
Contribution
Comment 12: Whether the Department
Applied Consistent Treatment of HRS
Producers In Terms of Ownership Status
Comment 13: Data Source To Be Used for the
Jingu Companies Under the HRS for Less
Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR)
Program
Comment 14: Whether the Department
Should Use a Tier-One, In-Country
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices
Benchmark in the Benefit Calculation of
the HRS for LTAR Program
Comment 15: Use of HRS Benchmark Data
That More Accurately Correspond to
Respondents’ Domestic Purchases of HRS
Comment 16: Whether the Department
Should Reduce the HRS Benchmark to
Account for the Cash Discounts That the
Jingu Companies Receive From Their HRS
Suppliers
Comment 17: Whether the HRS Benchmark
Prices Should Be Adjusted Downward To
Reflect the Prices the Jingu Companies
Paid for Non-Pickled and Non-Oiled HRS
Comment 18: Whether the Provision of HRS
for LTAR Is Specific Under the CVD Law
Comment 19: Whether It Was Appropriate To
Apply AFA With Regard to the GOC
Concerning the Provision of Electricity for
LTAR Program
Comment 20: Whether the Provision of
Electricity Is Not Countervailable Because
the Program Provides General
Infrastructure Which Does Not Constitute a
Financial Contribution
Comment 21: Whether Banks in the PRC Are
Government Authorities Capable of
Providing a Financial Contribution
Comment 22: Whether a Causal Nexus Exists
Between the GOC’s Industrial Policies and
Loans Received by Respondents
Comment 23: Whether the Department
Should Use a PRC-Based Tier-One or TierTwo Benchmark in the Benefit
Calculations of the Policy Lending Program
Comment 24: Whether the Department’s
Short-Term and Long-Term Benchmark
Interest Rate Calculations Are Flawed
Comment 25: Whether Tax Benefits Under
Article 28 of the Foreign Invested
Enterprise (FIE) Tax Law Are Specific
Comment 26: Revision to Import Duty Rate
for Testing Machinery
Comment 27: The Sales Denominator To Be
Used in the Benefit Calculations of the
Jingu Companies
Comment 28: Use of Revised Data To
Calculate Benefits Received by the
Centurion Companies Under the Two Free,
Three Half Program
Comment 29: Whether IPO Grants From the
Fuyang and Hangzhou City Governments
Are Countervailable
Comment 30: Whether the Administrative
Record of This Case Supports a Finding of
Critical Circumstances
Comment 31: Whether the Scope Should
Exclude Off-Road/Non-Department of
Transportation Specification Stamped
Wheels
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[FR Doc. 2012–7055 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Mar 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–973]
Certain Steel Wheels From the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative
Final Determination of Critical
Circumstances
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2012.
SUMMARY: On November 2, 2011, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published its
preliminary determination of sales at
less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the
antidumping investigation of certain
steel wheels (‘‘steel wheels’’) from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1
We invited interested parties to
comment on our preliminary
determination of sales at LTFV. Based
on our analysis of the comments we
received, we have made changes to our
margin calculations for the mandatory
respondents. The final dumping
margins for this investigation are listed
in the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’
section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brendan Quinn or Raquel Silva, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–5848 or (202) 482–
6475, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Case History
The Department published its
Preliminary Determination of sales at
LTFV on November 2, 2011. In
accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii),
we invited parties to comment on the
Preliminary Determination.
On November 3, 2011, the Department
issued a post-preliminary supplemental
questionnaire to Zhejiang Jingu
Company Limited (‘‘Zhejiang Jingu’’)
and its affiliated exporter Shanghai Yata
Industry Co., Ltd (‘‘Yata’’) (collectively
1 See Certain Steel Wheels From the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value,
Partial Affirmative Preliminary Determination of
Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final
Determination, 76 FR 67703 (November 2, 2011)
(‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). Less Than Fair
Value, Partial Affirmative Preliminary
Determination of Critical Circumstances, and
Postponement of Final Determination, 76 FR 67703
(November 2, 2011) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17021
‘‘Jingu’’). On November 14, 2011, Jingu
submitted its response to the
Department’s post-preliminary
supplemental questionnaire. Also on
November 14, 2011, Jingu and Jining
Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Jining Centurion’’) and its
affiliated U.S. reseller, Centurion Wheel
Manufacturing Company (‘‘Centurion
USA’’) (collectively ‘‘Centurion’’)
provided additional factual information
pertaining to respondents’ production
experience.
Between November 21, 2011, and
December 9, 2011, the Department
conducted verifications of Jining
Centurion and its affiliated U.S. reseller,
Centurion USA. Between December 1,
2011, and December 9, 2011, the
Department conducted verifications of
Zhejiang Jingu and its affiliated exporter
Yata. The Department released
verification reports for each verification
of Centurion and Jingu on January 10,
2012, and January 11, 2012,
respectively. The Department also
released an addendum to its verification
report regarding Centurion on January
23, 2012. Accuride Corporation and
Hayes Lemmerz International
(‘‘Petitioners’’) submitted their
comments regarding the Department’s
January 23, 2012, addendum on January
25, 2012.2
On December 19, 2011, Centurion and
Jingu submitted publicly available
surrogate value submissions. On
December 29, 2011, Petitioners
submitted rebuttal comments to Jingu’s
surrogate value submission. Case briefs
were submitted on January 20, 2012, by
the following parties: (1) Petitioners; (2)
the Government of China; (3)
Blackstone/OTR LLC and OTR Wheel
Engineering, Inc. (collectively
‘‘Blackstone’’); (4) Jingu; and (5)
Centurion. On January 25, 2012,
Centurion and Petitioners submitted
rebuttal briefs. On February 29, 2012,
the Department met with counsel for
Blackstone/OTR and Super Grip
Corporation, an interested party in this
proceeding. The Department met with
counsel for Petitioners on March 2,
2012.
Scope Comments
Following the Preliminary
Determination, on December 6, 2011,
the Department issued a postpreliminary supplemental questionnaire
to all interested parties requesting
further information regarding various
scope issues in this and the concurrent
countervailing duty investigation on
certain steel wheels from the PRC
2 See the ‘‘Verification’’ section below for
additional information.
E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM
23MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17017-17021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7055]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-974]
Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of China: Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Final Affirmative
Critical Circumstances Determination
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that
countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters
of certain steel wheels (steel wheels) from the People's Republic of
China (the PRC). For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see
the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this notice.
DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Conniff (for the Centurion
Companies)
[[Page 17018]]
at 202-482-1009, Robert Copyak (for the Jingu Companies) at 202-482-
2209, and Kristen Johnson (for the Xingmin Companies) at 202-482-4793,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 4014, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This investigation, which covers 28 programs, was initiated on
April 19, 2011.\1\ The petitioners in this investigation are Accuride
Corporation and Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc. The respondents in
this investigation are: Jining Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
(Centurion),\2\ Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co., Ltd. (Xingmin),\3\ and
Zhejiang Jingu Company Limited (Zhejiang Jingu).\4\ The Department
initially, in addition to Zhejiang Jingu, selected Jiangsu Yuantong
Auto Parts Co., Ltd. (Yuantong) and Zhejiang Jinfei Machinery Group Co.
Ltd. (Zhejiang Jinfei) to be mandatory respondents. Yuantong and
Zhejiang Jinfei, however, submitted responses to the Department's
shipment questionnaire in which each company certified that it did not
export subject merchandise to the United States during the period of
investigation (POI).\5\ We analyzed entry documents obtained from U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and found that the documentation
confirmed the non-shipment claims of Yuantong and Zhejiang Jinfei.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of
China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 76 FR 23302
(April 26, 2011).
\2\ We use the term Centurion Companies to refer collectively to
Centurion and its cross-owned affiliates under examination in this
investigation.
\3\ We use the term Xingmin Companies to refer collectively to
Xingmin and its cross-owned affiliates under examination in this
investigation.
\4\ We use the term Jingu Companies to refer collectively to
Zhejiang Jingu and its cross-owned affiliates under examination in
this investigation.
\5\ See Yuantong's and Zhejiang Jinfei's Shipment Questionnaire
Responses (May 20, 2011). The public version of each response and
all other public versions and public documents for this
investigation are available electronically via Import
Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Services System (IA ACCESS), located in the Department's
Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main Commerce building.
\6\ See Memorandum to the File from John Conniff, Trade Analyst,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, regarding ``Examination of Entry
Documentation,'' (August 29, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
The POI for which we are measuring subsidies is January 1, 2010,
through December 31, 2010, which corresponds to the PRC's most recently
completed fiscal year at the time we initiated this investigation. See
19 CFR 351.204(b)(2).
Case History
The following events have occurred since the Department published
the Preliminary Determination on September 6, 2011.\7\ On September 1,
2011, petitioners submitted a critical circumstances allegation. On
September 2, 2011, we issued a fourth supplemental questionnaire to the
Government of the People's Republic of China (GOC). On September 7,
2011, petitioners filed new subsidy allegations concerning land
provided for less than adequate remuneration to the Centurion Companies
and Jingu Companies. On September 9, 2011, we issued to the respondent
companies a critical circumstances questionnaire requesting monthly
volume and value data for shipments of subject merchandise to the
United States. Also, on September 9, 2011, we received the GOC's
response to the third supplemental questionnaire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic of
China: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and
Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determination with Final
Antidumping Duty Determination, 76 FR 55012 (September 6, 2011)
(Preliminary Determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 21, 2011, the Xingmin Companies filed a response to
the critical circumstances questionnaire. On September 23, 2011, the
GOC submitted its fourth supplemental questionnaire response. On
September 26, 2011, the Centurion Companies, Jingu Companies, and
Xiamen Sunrise Wheel Group Co., Ltd. (Sunrise) each filed a response to
the critical circumstances questionnaire.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Sunrise, a Chinese producer of subject merchandise, had
requested to be designated as a voluntary respondent. However,
because we determined that the Department had resources to
investigate only three companies, we did not designate Sunrise as a
voluntary respondent in this investigation. See Preliminary
Determination, 76 FR at 55013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 3, 2011, the GOC submitted certifications conforming to
the formats provided for in the Supplemental Interim Final Rule \9\ to
replace those certifications it had previously filed with the
Department that did not conform with the format provided in the Interim
Final Rule.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Supplemental Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 54697 (September
2, 2011) (Supplemental Interim Final Rule).
\10\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011)
(Interim Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 5, 2011, we determined that the petitioners' new subsidy
allegations were untimely filed and rejected the September 7, 2011,
submission.\11\ On October 6, 2011, the GOC requested a hearing in this
investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner, Director, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 3, from Robert Copyak, Senior Financial Analyst,
regarding ``Decision Memorandum Regarding Petitioners' New Subsidy
Allegations,'' (October 5, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 2, 2011, we issued a memorandum to the file regarding
the scope of the investigation. See Memorandum to the File from Kristen
Johnson, Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, regarding ``Scope
of the Investigation,'' (November 2, 2011). In the memorandum, we
explained that because the language of the scope covers steel wheels
ranging from 18 to 24.5 inches in diameter regardless of use, the
Department preliminarily determined in Steel Wheels AD Preliminary
Determination \12\ to add all of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) categories suggested by CBP to the scope of the
AD and CVD investigations on steel wheels from the PRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic of
China: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value, Partial Affirmative Preliminary Determination of
Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final Determination, 76
FR 67703 (November 2, 2011) (Steel Wheels AD Preliminary
Determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 18, 2011, we issued a verification outline to the
Xingmin Companies. On November 23, the Xingmin Companies filed
additional factual information. On November 28, 2011, the GOC submitted
new factual information. On December 2, 2011, the Department issued
letters to the Xingmin Companies and the GOC rejecting their additional
factual information submissions because those submissions contained
untimely filed information. On December 2 and 5, 2011, the Xingmin
Companies and the GOC, respectively, re-filed their additional factual
submissions excluding that information found by the Department to be
untimely. On December 5 and 6, 2011, the GOC and Xingmin Companies,
respectively, submitted comments disagreeing with Department's finding
that their initial additional factual information submissions contained
untimely information. Also, on December 5 and 6, 2011, the Department
conducted verification of the questionnaire responses submitted by the
Xingmin Companies.
On December 6, 2011, we issued a post-preliminary questionnaire to
all interested parties regarding the scope of the AD and CVD
investigations on steel
[[Page 17019]]
wheels from the PRC.\13\ On December 13, 2011, petitioners, the Xingmin
Companies, Jingu Companies, and Jiaxing Stone Wheel Co., Ltd.,\14\ each
submitted a post-preliminary supplemental questionnaire response to the
Department. On December 22 and 23, 2011, Blackstone/OTR LLC and OTR
Wheel Engineering, Inc. (collectively, Blackstone/OTR), a U.S. importer
of the subject merchandise, and petitioners, respectively, submitted
rebuttal comments to the post-preliminary supplemental questionnaire
responses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Memorandum to the File from Kristen Johnson, Trade
Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, regarding ``Post-Preliminary
Supplemental Questionnaire Issued to All Interested Parties,''
(December 6, 2011).
\14\ A Chinese producer of steel wheels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We issued the verification reports for the Xingmin Companies on
January 6, 2012. We issued the verification reports for the Centurion
Companies and the GOC on January 30, 2012. We issued the verification
report for the Jingu Companies on January 31, 2012.
On February 7, 2012, case briefs were submitted by the GOC,
Centurion Companies, Jingu Companies, Xingmin Companies, and
Blackstone/OTR. A rebuttal brief was filed by petitioners on February
13, 2012. On February 22, 2012, the GOC notified the Department that it
was withdrawing its request for a hearing in this investigation.
On March 2, 2012, we published the Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination,\15\ in which the Department discussed the
arguments made by petitioners.\16\ On March 6, 2012, case briefs were
submitted by interested parties concerning the Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination and rebuttal briefs were filed on March 9,
2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic of
China: Notice of Preliminary Negative Determination of Critical
Circumstances, 77 FR 12812 (March 2, 2012) (Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination).
\16\ In the Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination,
the Department stated the following:
Petitioners provided Census Bureau Data, which they contend
demonstrate that imports of subject merchandise increased by more
than 15 percent, which is required to be considered ``massive''
under section 351.206(h)(2) of the Department's regulations.
Petitioners submit that, by volume, imports increased approximately
48 percent from 510,174 wheels in the first quarter of 2011, to
753,604 wheels in the second quarter of 2010. Id. at 3 and Exhibit
1. Petitioners also contend that, by value, imports increased
approximately 40 percent, from $17,787,704 in the first quarter of
2011, to $24,893,481 in the second quarter of 2010. Id.
See 77 FR at 12812. In discussing the second quarter import data
supplied by petitioners we inadvertently referred to 2010 rather
than 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 6, 2012, the Department rejected Blackstone/OTR's February
7, 2012, case brief because it contained new factual information.
Blackstone/OTR re-filed is case brief excluding the new factual
information on March 8, 2012.
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are steel wheels with a
wheel diameter of 18 to 24.5 inches. Rims and discs for such wheels are
included, whether imported as an assembly or separately. These products
are used with both tubed and tubeless tires. Steel wheels, whether or
not attached to tires or axles, are included. However, if the steel
wheels are imported as an assembly attached to tires or axles, the tire
or axle is not covered by the scope. The scope includes steel wheels,
discs, and rims of carbon and/or alloy composition and clad wheels,
discs, and rims when carbon or alloy steel represents more than fifty
percent of the product by weight. The scope includes wheels, rims, and
discs, whether coated or uncoated, regardless of the type of coating.
Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under the
following categories of the HTSUS: 8708.70.05.00, 8708.70.25.00,
8708.70.45.30, and 8708.70.60.30. Imports of the subject merchandise
may also enter under the following categories of the HTSUS:
8406.90.4580, 8406.90.7500, 8420.99.9000, 8422.90.1100,
8422.90.2100, 8422.90.9120, 8422.90.9130, 8422.90.9160, 8422.90.9195,
8431.10.0010, 8431.10.0090, 8431.20.0000, 8431.31.0020, 8431.31.0040,
8431.31.0060, 8431.39.0010, 8431.39.0050, 8431.39.0070, 8431.39.0080,
8431.43.8060, 8431.49.1010, 8431.49.1060, 8431.49.1090, 8431.49.9030,
8431.49.9040, 8431.49.9085, 8432.90.0005, 8432.90.0015, 8432.90.0030,
8432.90.0080, 8433.90.1000, 8433.90.5020, 8433.90.5040, 8436.99.0020,
8436.99.0090, 8479.90.9440, 8479.90.9450, 8479.90.9496, 8487.90.0080,
8607.19.1200, 8607.19.1500, 8708.70.1500, 8708.70.3500, 8708.70.4560,
8708.70.6060, 8709.90.0000, 8710.00.0090, 8714.19.0030, 8714.19.0060,
8716.90.1000, 8716.90.5030, 8716.90.5060, 8803.20.0015, 8803.20.0030,
and 8803.20.0060. These HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and
customs purposes only; the written description of the scope is
dispositive.
Injury Test
Because the PRC is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the
meaning of section 701(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the International Trade Commission (the ITC) is required to
determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from the PRC
materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. On
May 20, 2011, the ITC published its preliminary determination finding
that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United
States is materially injured or threatened with material injury by
reason of imports from China of certain steel wheels.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Certain Steel Wheels From China, Investigation Nos.
701-TA-478 and 731-TA-1182 (Preliminary), 76 FR 29265 (May 20,
2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical Circumstances
In the Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination, the
Department concluded that critical circumstances do not exist with
respect to steel wheels from the PRC produced and exported by the Jingu
Companies, the Centurion Companies, and the Xingming Companies, in
accordance with section 703(e)(1) of the Act. See Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination, 77 FR at 12813-12814. However, in the
Preliminary Critical Circumstances Determination the Department
concluded that critical circumstances exist for imports from ``all
other'' exporters of steel wheels from the PRC. Id. Our analysis of the
results of verification and the comments submitted by interested
parties has not led us to change our findings from the Preliminary
Critical Circumstances Determination. Therefore, in accordance with
section 705(a)(2) of the Act, we continue to find that critical
circumstances exist with respect to imports from ``all other''
exporters of steel wheels from the PRC.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by
parties to this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum, dated concurrently with this notice and which is hereby
adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties raised, and
to which we have responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is
attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Issues and Decision
Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via
Import Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). Access to IA ACCESS is available
in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a complete
[[Page 17020]]
version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Issues and
Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we have
calculated an individual rate for subject merchandise produced and
exported by each company under investigation. We determine the total
estimated net countervailable subsidy rates to be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net subsidy ad
Producer/exporter valorem rate
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jining Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. 25.66
(Centurion) and Jining CII Wheel Manufacture Co., Ltd.
(Jining CII) (collectively the Centurion Companies)....
Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co., Ltd. (Xingmin) and Sino-tex 32.62
(Longkou) Wheel Manufacturers Inc. (Sino-tex)
(collectively, the Xingmin Companies)..................
Zhejiang Jingu Company Limited (Zhejiang Jingu), Chengdu 38.32
Jingu Wheel Co., Ltd. (Chengdu), Zhejiang Wheel World
Industrial Co., Ltd. (Zhejiang Wheel World), and
Shanghai Yata Industrial Co., Ltd. (Shanghai Yata)
(collectively the Jingu Companies).....................
All Others.............................................. 34.55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act state that for companies not
investigated, we will determine an all-others rate by weighting the
individual company subsidy rate of each of the companies investigated
by each company's exports of the subject merchandise to the United
States. The all others rate may not include zero and de minimis rates
or any rates based solely on the facts available. In this
investigation, all three individual rates can be used to calculate the
all others rate. Therefore, we have assigned the weighted-average of
these three individual rates to all other producers/exporters of steel
wheels from the PRC.
As a result of our Preliminary Determination and pursuant to
section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to suspend liquidation of
all entries of subject merchandise from the PRC which were entered or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after September 6,
2011, the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in
the Federal Register. Subsequently, as a result of our Preliminary
Critical Circumstances Determination, we instructed CBP to suspend
liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise from ``all other''
exporters of steel wheels from the PRC which were entered or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after June 8, 2011, which is 90
days prior to the date of publication in the Federal Register of the
Preliminary Determination.
In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued
instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for
CVD purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, on or after January 4, 2012, but to continue the suspension
of liquidation of all entries from September 6, 2011, through January
3, 2012.
We will issue a CVD order and reinstate the suspension of
liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act if the ITC issues a final
affirmative injury determination, and will require a cash deposit of
estimated CVDs for such entries of merchandise in the amounts indicated
above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of
material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and
all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of the
suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or
under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written
consent of the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information
In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties
subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the 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 violation which is subject to sanction.
This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and
777(i) of the Act.
Dated: March 16, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix
List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Application of CVD Law to Non-Market Economies (NMEs)
Comment 2: Application of CVD Law to NMEs Results in Double-Counting
Comment 3: Whether the Burden of Proving Double-Counting Lies With
Respondents
Comment 4: Proper ``Cut-Off'' Date To Be Applied in the
Investigation
Comment 5: Whether the Department's Examination of Additional
Subsidy Program Was Lawful
Comment 6: Whether It Was Appropriate for the Department To Reject
the Xingmin Companies' Factual Information
Comment 7: Whether It Was Appropriate for the Department To Reject
Centurion Companies' Factual Information
Comment 8: Whether Certain Hot-Rolled Steel (HRS) Producers
Constitute Government Authorities That Provide a Financial
Contribution
Comment 9: Whether Purchases of HRS From Domestic Trading Companies
Constituted a Financial Contribution
Comment 10: Whether the GOC Acted to the Best of Its Ability To
Provide Information Regarding the Ownership Status of HRS Producers
Comment 11: The Extent To Which Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
Membership is Relevant in Determining Whether HRS Producers Are
Government Authorities Capable of Providing a Financial Contribution
Comment 12: Whether the Department Applied Consistent Treatment of
HRS Producers In Terms of Ownership Status
Comment 13: Data Source To Be Used for the Jingu Companies Under the
HRS for Less Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) Program
Comment 14: Whether the Department Should Use a Tier-One, In-Country
[[Page 17021]]
Benchmark in the Benefit Calculation of the HRS for LTAR Program
Comment 15: Use of HRS Benchmark Data That More Accurately
Correspond to Respondents' Domestic Purchases of HRS
Comment 16: Whether the Department Should Reduce the HRS Benchmark
to Account for the Cash Discounts That the Jingu Companies Receive
From Their HRS Suppliers
Comment 17: Whether the HRS Benchmark Prices Should Be Adjusted
Downward To Reflect the Prices the Jingu Companies Paid for Non-
Pickled and Non-Oiled HRS
Comment 18: Whether the Provision of HRS for LTAR Is Specific Under
the CVD Law
Comment 19: Whether It Was Appropriate To Apply AFA With Regard to
the GOC Concerning the Provision of Electricity for LTAR Program
Comment 20: Whether the Provision of Electricity Is Not
Countervailable Because the Program Provides General Infrastructure
Which Does Not Constitute a Financial Contribution
Comment 21: Whether Banks in the PRC Are Government Authorities
Capable of Providing a Financial Contribution
Comment 22: Whether a Causal Nexus Exists Between the GOC's
Industrial Policies and Loans Received by Respondents
Comment 23: Whether the Department Should Use a PRC-Based Tier-One
or Tier-Two Benchmark in the Benefit Calculations of the Policy
Lending Program
Comment 24: Whether the Department's Short-Term and Long-Term
Benchmark Interest Rate Calculations Are Flawed
Comment 25: Whether Tax Benefits Under Article 28 of the Foreign
Invested Enterprise (FIE) Tax Law Are Specific
Comment 26: Revision to Import Duty Rate for Testing Machinery
Comment 27: The Sales Denominator To Be Used in the Benefit
Calculations of the Jingu Companies
Comment 28: Use of Revised Data To Calculate Benefits Received by
the Centurion Companies Under the Two Free, Three Half Program
Comment 29: Whether IPO Grants From the Fuyang and Hangzhou City
Governments Are Countervailable
Comment 30: Whether the Administrative Record of This Case Supports
a Finding of Critical Circumstances
Comment 31: Whether the Scope Should Exclude Off-Road/Non-Department
of Transportation Specification Stamped Wheels
[FR Doc. 2012-7055 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
