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 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 http://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 http://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