Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 42292-42298 [2014-17111]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
42292
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–821]
Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From
Thailand: Notice of Court Decision Not
in Harmony With Final Results of
Administrative Review and Notice of
Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review; 2008–2009
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On February 11, 2013, the
U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the Department of
Commerce’s (the Department’s) final
results of remand redetermination
pursuant to the CIT’s remand order.1
Consistent with the decision of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(CAFC) in Timken Co., v. United States,
893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken),
as clarified by Diamond Sawblades
Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond
Sawblades), the Department is notifying
the public that the final judgment of the
CIT in this case is not in harmony with
the Department’s final results of
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on
polyethylene retail carrier bags (PRCBs)
from Thailand covering the period of
review (POR) of August 1, 2008 through
July 31, 2009, and is amending its final
results of this review with respect to the
weighted-average dumping margins
calculated for Thai Plastic Bags
Industries Company (TPBI).2
DATES: Effective Date: February 21,
2013.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Thomas Schauer, AD/CVD Operations,
Office I, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–0410.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department published the final results
of the 2008–2009 administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on
1 See Thai Plastic Bags Industries Co., Ltd., v.
United States, 895 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (CIT 2013)
(‘‘Thai Plastic Bags II’’); Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Court Remand, Thai Plastic Bags
Industries Co., Ltd., Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bag
Committee, Hilex Poly Co., LLC, and Superbag
Corporation, v. United States, Consol. Court No.
11–00086, dated September 14, 2012 (Remand
Results).
2 See Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags From
Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 76 FR 12700 (March 8,
2011) (Final Results).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jul 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
PRCBs from Thailand on March 8, 2011.
Both Thai Plastic Bags Industries Co.,
Ltd., (TPBI) and the Polyethylene Retail
Carrier Bag Committee (and its
individual members, Hilex Poly Co.,
LLC and Superbag Corp. (collectively,
the petitioner)) timely filed complaints
with the CIT to challenge various
aspects of the Final Results. On June 18,
2012, the CIT remanded for the
Department to provided further
explanation for its construction of
section 771(35) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), with respect to
antidumping duty investigations and
administrative reviews and to
reconsider its position regarding the
application of the transactions
disregarded rule to TPBI’s purchases of
linear-low-density resin from affiliated
suppliers.3
On September 14, 2012, the
Department filed the Remand Results
with the CIT, in which the Department
provided further explanation for its
construction of section 771(35) of the
Act, with respect to antidumping duty
investigations and administrative
reviews, reconsidered its position
regarding the application of the
transactions disregarded rule to TPBI’s
purchases of linear-low-density resin
from affiliated suppliers, and revised its
treatment of those transactions.
Accordingly, the Department
recalculated TPBI’s weighted-average
dumping margin from 20.15 percent to
21.29 percent. On November 13, 2013,
the CIT affirmed the Department’s
Remand Results.4
TPBI appealed the CIT’s decision to
the CAFC. On March 31, 2014, the
CAFC affirmed the Department’s
Remand Results.5 The CAFC’s holding
is now final and conclusive.
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at
341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,
the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant
to section 516A(e) of the Act, the
Department must publish a notice of a
court decision not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a
Department determination, and must
suspend liquidation of entries pending
a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s
February 11, 2013, judgment constitutes
a final decision of the CIT that is not in
harmony with the Department’s Final
Results. This notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication
requirement of Timken.
3 See Thai Plastic Bags Industries Co., Ltd., v.
United States, 853 F. Supp. 2d 1267 (CIT 2012)
(Remand Order).
4 See Thai Plastic Bags II, 895 F. Supp. 2d at
1345.
5 See Thai Plastic Bags Industries Co., Ltd., v.
United States, 746 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Amended Final Results
For the reasons stated above, the
Department is amending its Final
Results with respect to TPBI’s weightedaverage dumping margin for this POR.
The revised weighted-average dumping
margin for TPBI is 21.29 percent.
Accordingly, the Department will
instruct United State Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate
entries of subject merchandise by TPBI
in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1).6 Because the order on
PRCBs from Thailand was revoked in
part with respect to TPBI effective July
28, 2010,7 we will not instruct CBP to
collect cash deposits for entries of
subject merchandise by TPBI.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: July 15, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014–17085 Filed 7–18–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–016]
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light
Truck Tires From the People’s
Republic of China: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigation
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective: July 21, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni
Page and Emily Halle, Office VII, AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–1398 and (202)
482–0176, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
The Petition
On June 3, 2014, the Department of
Commerce (Department) received an
antidumping duty (AD) petition
concerning imports of certain passenger
vehicle and light truck tires (certain
passenger tires) from the People’s
6 See
Final Results, 76 FR at 12701–2.
Notice of Implementation of Determination
Under Section 129 of the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act and Partial Revocation of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Polyethylene Retail
Carrier Bags From Thailand, 75 FR 48940 (August
12, 2010).
7 See
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices
Republic of China (PRC), officially filed
in proper form on behalf of the United
Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber,
Manufacturing, Energy, Allied
Industrial and Service Workers
International Union, AFL–CIO–CLC
(Petitioner).1 The AD Petition was
accompanied by a countervailing duty
(CVD) petition concerning imports of
certain passenger tires from the PRC.
Petitioner is a recognized union, which
represents the domestic industry
engaged in the manufacture of passenger
vehicle tires in the United States. On
June 6, 2014, the Department requested
additional information and clarification
of certain areas of the Petition,2 and on
June 10, 2014, Petitioner filed responses
to these requests.3 On June 23 and July
7, 2014, Petitioner filed supplemental
submissions to clarify the scope of the
investigation.4 Because it was not clear
from the Petitions whether the industry
support criteria had been met, the
Department extended the time for
initiating this investigation in order to
further examine the issue of industry
support by 20 additional days.5 The
extended initiation determination date
of July 13, 2014, falls on a Sunday, a
non-business day, so the Department’s
initiation determination is due no later
than July 14, 2014, the next business
day.6
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1 See
‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping
Duties on Imports of Certain Passenger Vehicle and
Light Truck Tires from the People’s Republic of
China,’’ (June 3, 2014) (Petition).
2 See Letter to Petitioner, ‘‘Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Certain Passenger Vehicle and
Light Truck Tires from the People’s Republic of
China: Supplemental Questions,’’ June 6, 2014
(General Issues Supplemental Questions).
3 See Letter from Petitioner ‘‘Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People’s
Republic of China—Petitioner’s Response to the
Department’s June 6, 2014 Supplemental
Questions—Antidumping,’’ June 10, 2014 (AD
Supplement); see also ‘‘Certain Passenger Vehicle
and Light Truck Tires from the People’s Republic
of China—Petitioner’s Response to the Department’s
June 6, 2014 Supplemental Questions regarding
General Issues,’’ June 10, 2014 (General Issues
Supplement).
4 See Letter from Petitioner, ‘‘Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People’s
Republic of China—Petitioner’s Scope Clarification
Request,’’ June 23, 2014 (Scope Supplement); see
also Petitioner’s filing ‘‘Certain Passenger Vehicle
and Light Truck Tires from the People’s Republic
of China—Petitioner’s Second Scope Clarification
Request,’’ July 7, 2014 (Second Scope Supplement).
5 See Notice of Extension of the Deadline for
Determining the Adequacy of the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions: Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People’s
Republic of China, 79 FR 35725 (June 24, 2014).
6 See Notice of Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next
Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative
Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act
of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005)
(Next Business Day Rule).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jul 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
Act), Petitioner alleges that imports of
certain passenger tires from the PRC are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value
within the meaning of section 731 of the
Act, and that such imports are
materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, an industry in the
United States. Also, consistent with
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition
is accompanied by information
reasonably available to Petitioner in
support of its allegations.
The Department finds that Petitioner
filed the Petition on behalf of the
domestic industry because Petitioner is
an interested party as defined in section
771(9)(D) of the Act, and has
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the initiation of
the AD investigation that it is
requesting.7
Period of Investigation
Because the Petition was filed on June
3, 2014, the period of investigation (POI)
is October 1, 2013, through March 31,
2014.8
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this
investigation is certain passenger tires
from the PRC. For a full description of
the scope of the investigation, see the
‘‘Scope of the Investigation’’ at the
Appendix of this notice.
Comments on the Scope of the
Investigation
During our review of the Petition, the
Department issued questions to, and
received responses from, Petitioner
pertaining to the proposed scope in
order to ensure that the language of the
scope is an accurate reflection of the
products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief.9 As discussed
in the Preamble to the Department’s
regulations, we are setting aside a
period for interested parties to raise
issues regarding product coverage
(scope).10 The period for scope
comments is intended to provide the
Department with ample opportunity to
consider all comments and to consult
with parties prior to the issuance of the
preliminary determination. If scope
comments include factual
information,11 all such factual
7 See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the
Petition’’ section, below.
8 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
9 See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire;
see also General Issues Supplement at 2–5 and
Exhibits I–SQ–2 through I–SQ–6; Scope
Supplement at 2–3 and Exhibit 1; see also Second
Scope Supplement at 2 and Exhibit 1.
10 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties
(Final Rule); 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
11 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42293
information should be limited to public
information. All such comments must
be filed by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (EDT)
on August 4, 2014, which is 20 calendar
days from the signature date of this
notice.12 Any rebuttal comments, which
may include factual information, must
be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 14,
2014, which is 10 calendar days after
the initial comments. The Department
requests that any factual information the
parties consider relevant to the scope of
the investigation be submitted during
this time period. However, if a party
subsequently finds that additional
factual information pertaining to the
scope of the investigation may be
relevant, the party may contact the
Department and request permission to
submit the additional information. All
such comments must be filed on the
records of the AD investigation, as well
as the concurrent CVD investigation.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department
must be filed electronically using
Enforcement and Compliance’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System
(IA ACCESS). An electronically filed
document must be received successfully
in its entirety by 5:00 p.m. ET on the
date specified by the Department.
Documents excepted from the electronic
submission requirements must be filed
manually (i.e., in paper form) with
Enforcement and Compliance’s APO/
Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped
with the date and time of receipt by the
applicable deadline.13
Comments on the Product
Characteristics for the AD
Questionnaire
The Department requests comments
from interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of
certain passenger tires to be reported in
response to the Department’s AD
questionnaire. This information will be
used to identify the key physical
12 As 20 days from the signature date will be
Saturday August 2, 2014, the next business day for
filing comments will be Monday August 4, 2014.
See Next Business Day Rule.
13 See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1); see also
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative
Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6,
2011) for details of the Department’s electronic
filing requirements, which went into effect on
August 5, 2011. Information on help using IA
ACCESS can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/
help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook
%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20
Procedures.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
42294
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
characteristics of the subject
merchandise in order to report the
relevant factors of production
accurately, as well as to develop
appropriate product-comparison
criteria.
Interested parties may provide any
information or comments that they
believe are relevant to the development
of an accurate list of physical
characteristics. Specifically, interested
parties may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to
use as: (1) General product
characteristics and (2) productcomparison criteria. We note that it is
not always appropriate to use all
product characteristics as productcomparison criteria. We base productcomparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products.
In other words, while there may be
some physical product characteristics
utilized by manufacturers to describe
certain passenger tires, it may be that
only a select few product characteristics
take into account commercially
meaningful physical characteristics. In
addition, interested parties may
comment on the order in which the
physical characteristics should be used
in matching products. Generally, the
Department attempts to list the most
important physical characteristics first
and the least important characteristics
last.
In order to consider the suggestions of
interested parties in developing and
issuing the AD questionnaire, we must
receive comments on product
characteristics no later than August 4,
2014. Rebuttal comments must be
received no later than August 14, 2014.
All comments and submissions to the
Department must be filed electronically
using IA ACCESS, as referenced above.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act provides that a petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) At least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D)
of the Act provides that, if the petition
does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product,
the Department shall: (i) Poll the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Jul 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
industry or rely on other information in
order to determine if there is support for
the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine
industry support using a statistically
valid sampling method to poll the
industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines
the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a
whole of a domestic like product. Thus,
to determine whether a petition has the
requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to
producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S.
International Trade Commission (ITC),
which is responsible for determining
whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has
been injured, must also determine what
constitutes a domestic like product in
order to define the industry. While both
the Department and the ITC must apply
the same statutory definition regarding
the domestic like product,14 they do so
for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department’s
determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this
may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not
render the decision of either agency
contrary to law.15
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
which is like, or in the absence of like,
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the
reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’
(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in the Petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, Petitioner does not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we determine that certain
passenger vehicle and light truck tires,
as defined in the scope of the
investigation, constitute a single
domestic like product and we analyzed
industry support in terms of that
domestic like product.16
section 771(10) of the Act.
USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp.
2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd.
v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988),
aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
16 See Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light
Truck Tires from the People’s Republic of China
(AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis
of Industry Support for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the
PO 00000
14 See
15 See
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
On June 12, 2014, we received
comments on industry support from the
Sub-Committee of Tire Producers of the
China Chamber of Commerce of Metals,
Minerals & Chemical Importers and the
China Rubber Industry Association.17
Petitioner responded to these comments
on June 16 and 17, 2014.18 In a meeting
on July 8, 2014, the Government of the
PRC also commented on industry
support for the Petition.19
On June 17, 2014, the Department
extended the initiation deadline by 20
days to poll the domestic industry in
accordance with section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act, because it was ‘‘not clear from
the Petitions whether the industry
support criteria have been met. . . .’’ 20
On June 20, 2014, we issued polling
questionnaires to all known producers
of certain passenger vehicle and light
truck tires in the United States,
identified in the Petition and by the ITC,
as well as all known unions, employee
organizations, or ad hoc groups of
workers.21 We requested that the
companies/workers complete the
polling questionnaire and certify their
responses by the due date specified in
the cover letter to the questionnaire.22
Petitioner provided comments on the
polling questionnaire responses on July
8, 2014.23
People’s Republic of China (Attachment II). This
checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and
on file electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to
documents filed via IA ACCESS is also available in
the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the
main Department of Commerce building.
17 See Letter, ‘‘Request to Poll the Domestic
Industry to Determine Petitioner Standing: Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from
China,’’ June 12, 2014.
18 See Letter from Petitioner, ‘‘Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People’s
Republic of China—Petitioner’s Response to
CCCMC and CRIA’s Request to Poll the Industry,’’
June 16, 2014; see also Letter from Petitioner,
‘‘Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires
from the People’s Republic of China—Additional
Information in Response to CCCMC and CRIA’s
Request to Poll the Industry,’’ June 17, 2014.
19 See Memorandum, ‘‘Antidumping Duty
Investigation of 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the
People’s Republic of China and the Antidumping
Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions for Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the
People’s Republic of China: Meeting with Officials
from the Government of the People’s Republic of
China,’’ July 9, 2014.
20 See Notice of Extension of the Deadline for
Determining the Adequacy of the Antidumping
Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions: Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the
People’s Republic of China, 79 FR 35725, 35726
(June 24, 2014).
21 See Memorandum, ‘‘Certain Passenger Vehicle
and Light Truck Tires from the People’s Republic
of China: Polling Questionnaire,’’ June 20, 2014.
22 For a detailed discussion of the responses
received, see AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment
II. The polling questionnaire and questionnaire
responses are on file electronically via IA ACCESS
and can also be accessed through the CRU.
23 See Letter from Petitioner, ‘‘Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People’s
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices
Our analysis of the data we received
in the polling questionnaire responses
indicates that the domestic producers
and workers that support the Petition
account for at least 25 percent of the
total production of the domestic like
product and more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the Petition.24 Accordingly, the
Department determines that the
industry support requirements of
section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act have
been met. Therefore, the Department
determines that Petitioner filed this
Petition on behalf of the domestic
industry in accordance with section
732(b)(1) of the Act because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(D) of the Act and it demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect
to the AD investigation that it is
requesting the Department initiate.25
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Petitioner alleges that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal
value (NV). In addition, Petitioner
alleges that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.26
Petitioner contends that the industry’s
injured condition is illustrated by
reduced market share; underselling and
price depression or suppression; lost
sales and revenues; direct replacement
of domestic shipments by subject
imports; decline in shipments, reduced
sales volumes, and production
curtailments; decline in capacity
utilization and reduced capacity
allocated to U.S. production of certain
passenger tires; decline in employment;
adverse impact on union contract
negotiations; and adverse impact on
financial performance.27 We assessed
the allegations and supporting evidence
regarding material injury, threat of
material injury, and causation, and we
determined that these allegations are
properly supported by adequate
Republic of China—Petitioner’s Comments on
Polling Responses,’’ July 8, 2014.
24 See AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
25 Id.
26 See Volume I of the Petition at I–18 and Exhibit
I–12.
27 See Volume I of the Petition, at I–15 through
I–57 and Exhibits I–2, I–3, and I–12 through I–53;
see also General Issues Supplement at 1 and Exhibit
I–SQ–1.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jul 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
evidence and meet the statutory
requirements for initiation.28
Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value
The following is a description of the
allegation of sales at less than fair value
upon which the Department based its
decision to initiate an investigation of
imports of certain passenger tires from
the PRC. The sources of data for the
deductions and adjustments relating to
U.S. price and NV are discussed in
greater detail in the AD Initiation
Checklist.
Export Price
Petitioner based export price (EP) on
import data obtained from the U.S.
Department of Commerce’s Foreign
Trade Division Merchandise Imports
database (Imports database) for certain
passenger tires. Petitioner calculated the
average unit values (AUVs) per kilogram
for U.S. imports of certain passenger
tires from the PRC entered during the
POI under ten Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
subheadings that cover certain
passenger tires. As the Import database
import values reflect customs values
and therefore exclude U.S. import
duties, freight, and insurance, Petitioner
made adjustments to deduct unrebated
value added tax, foreign inland freight,
and brokerage and handling at port of
exportation to derive a U.S. net price.29
Normal Value
Petitioner states that the Department
has treated the PRC as a non-market
economy (NME) country in every
proceeding in which the PRC has been
involved.30 The presumption of NME
status for the PRC has not been revoked
by the Department and, therefore, in
accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of
the Act, remains in effect for purposes
of the initiation of this investigation.
Accordingly, the NV of the product for
the investigation is appropriately based
on factors of production (FOPs) valued
in a surrogate market-economy country
in accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act. In the course of this investigation,
all parties will have the opportunity to
provide relevant information related to
the issues of the PRC’s NME status and
AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the
People’s Republic of China.
29 See Volume II of the Petition at II–6 through
II–7; AD Supplement at Exhibit II–SQ–16; and AD
Initiation Checklist.
30 See Volume II of the Petition at II–2.
PO 00000
28 See
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42295
granting of separate rates to individual
exporters.
Petitioner contends that Thailand is
the appropriate surrogate country for the
PRC because: (1) It is at a level of
economic development comparable to
that of the PRC; (2) it is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise;
and (3) the data for Thailand for valuing
factors of production are available and
reliable.31 Based on the information
provided by Petitioner, we conclude
that it is appropriate to use Thailand as
a surrogate country for initiation
purposes.32 After initiation of this
investigation, interested parties will
have the opportunity to submit
comments regarding surrogate country
selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an
opportunity to submit publicly available
information to value FOPs within 30
days before the scheduled date of the
preliminary determination.33
Petitioner calculated NV using the
Department’s NME methodology as
required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C)
and 19 CFR 351.408. As Petitioner is a
union representing workers in the
domestic industry producing certain
passenger tires and is not a domestic
producer, Petitioner contends it does
not have access to the proprietary
information on the factors of production
necessary to make certain passenger
tires. Therefore, Petitioner based NV on
publicly available information regarding
the standard direct materials used to
manufacture certain passenger tires
from a number of publications.34
Petitioner asserts that the publicly
available raw material models it
provided are representative, to the best
of its knowledge, of the average makeup
of certain passenger tires.35 Using this
information, Petitioner calculated the
average percentage of total tire weight
represented by each direct material for
passenger car tires and for light truck
tires. The information regarding the
percentages of direct materials used to
make a subject tire were applied to the
average tire weight for each of the ten
HTSUS categories of certain passenger
tires obtained from the Imports database
to calculate the average amount of each
31 Id. at II–2 through II–6 and Exhibits II–1
through II–4.
32 See AD Initiation Checklist.
33 See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i). Note that this is
the revised regulation published on April 10, 2013.
See https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/
2013-08227.txt.
34 See Volume II of the Petition at II–8 through
II–10 and Exhibits II–10 through II–21; see also AD
Supplement at 3–5.
35 Id.
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
42296
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices
direct material used in the manufacture
of the subject merchandise.36
Petitioner valued the FOPs using
reasonably available, public surrogate
country data, specifically, Thai import
data from the Global Trade Atlas (GTA)
for the period October 2013 through
March 2014.37 Petitioner excluded from
these GTA import statistics imports
from countries previously determined
by the Department to be NME countries,
countries previously determined by the
Department to maintain broadly
available, non-industry-specific export
subsidies, and, in accordance with the
Department’s practice, any imports that
were labeled as originating from an
‘‘unspecified’’ country.38 Petitioner
valued most of the direct material
inputs (synthetic rubber, fillers,
compounding ingredients, reinforcing
materials, scrap, and alternative
materials) using GTA Thai import
data.39 Petitioner valued natural rubber
using information from the Rubber
Research Institute of Thailand. 40 The
Department determines that the
surrogate values used by Petitioner are
reasonably available and, thus, are
acceptable for purposes of initiation.
Petitioner calculated the average labor
hours required to make one tire using
the employment and production
information from the financial
statements of three PRC tire
manufacturers (GITI Tire, Doublestar
Tyre, and Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd.).41
Petitioner then used the weightaveraged amount of the three labor rates
to determine an overall average of labor
hours required to make one subject tire.
Petitioner calculated the average hourly
labor rate for an employee producing
tires using a 2007 Thailand wage rate
from the National Statistics Office’s
2007 Industrial Census, and adjusted
this rate for inflation using the
consumer price index (CPI) data for
Thailand published by the International
Financial Statistics (IFS) and converted
it to USD using the POI average
exchange rate.42
Petitioner calculated financial ratios
(i.e., factory overhead expenses, selling,
general, and administrative expenses,
and profit) based on the 2013 year-end
financial statements of Goodyear
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
36 Id.
37 See Volume II of the Petition at II–10 and
Exhibit II–23.
38 Id. at II–10 through II–11.
39 Id. at Exhibit II–23.
40 Id. at Exhibit II–24.
41 Id. at II–14 and Exhibits II–25 through II–26;
see also AD Supplement at 5–9 and Exhibits II–SQ–
3, II–SQ–5, and II–SQ–6.
42 See Volume II of the Petition at II–14 through
II–15 and Exhibits II–27, II–32, and II–33; see also
AD Supplement at 10 and Exhibit II–SQ–12.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jul 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
(Thailand) Public Company Limited
(Goodyear) and Hwa Fong Rubber
(Thailand) Public Company Limited
(Hwa Fong), Thai manufacturers of tires,
for the year ending December 31,
2013.43 Because information provided
by Petitioner indicates that Hwa Fong
produces bicycle and motorcycle tires,
which are not subject merchandise,
while Goodyear produces certain
passenger tires, we are only relying on
Goodyear’s financial statements for
financial ratios.44
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by
Petitioner, there is reason to believe that
imports of certain passenger tires from
the PRC are being, or are likely to be,
sold in the United States at less than fair
value. Based on the comparison of net
U.S. price to NV for the same or similar
passenger tires in accordance with
section 773(c) of the Act, Petitioner’s
estimated margins for certain passenger
tires ranged from 45.80 to 87.99
percent.45
Initiation of AD Investigation
Based on our examination of the
Petition on certain passenger tires from
the PRC, the Department finds that the
Petition meets the requirements of
section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are
initiating an AD investigation to
determine whether imports of certain
passenger tires from the PRC are being,
or likely to be, sold in the United States
at less than fair value. In accordance
with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed,
we will make our preliminary
determination no later than 140 days
after the date of this initiation. For a
discussion of evidence supporting our
initiation determination, see the AD
Initiation Checklist which accompanies
this notice.
Respondent Selection
In accordance with our standard
practice for respondent selection in AD
investigations involving NME countries,
we intend to issue quantity and value
questionnaires to each potential
respondent named in the Petition,46 and
will base respondent selection on the
responses received. In addition, the
Department will post the quantity and
value questionnaire along with the filing
43 See Volume II of the Petition at II–15 through
II–16 and Exhibits II–29 and II–30; see also AD
Supplement at 10–13 and Exhibits II–SQ–13
through II–SQ–17.
44 See AD Initiation Checklist under the
‘‘Adjustments to Normal Value’’ section.
45 See AD Supplement at Exhibit II–SQ–17 (chart
titled ‘‘Weighted average labor rate; original
Goodyear financial ratios only (profit reduced)’’).
46 See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I–9.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
instructions on the Enforcement and
Compliance Web site (https://trade.gov/
enforcement/news.asp). Exporters and
producers of certain passenger tires
from the PRC that do not receive
quantity and value questionnaires via
mail may still submit a quantity and
value response, and can obtain a copy
from the Enforcement and Compliance
Web site. The quantity and value
questionnaire must be submitted by all
PRC exporters/producers no later than
August 1, 2014. All quantity and value
questionnaires must be filed
electronically using IA ACCESS.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate rate status
in an NME AD investigation, exporters
and producers must submit a separate
rate application.47 The specific
requirements for submitting the separate
rate application in the PRC investigation
are outlined in detail in the application
itself, which will be available on the
Department’s Web site at https://
trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp on the
date of publication of this initiation
notice in the Federal Register. The
separate rate application will be due 60
days after the publication of this
initiation notice. For exporters and
producers who submit a separate rate
status application and have been
selected as mandatory respondents,
these exporters and producers will no
longer be eligible for consideration for
separate rate status unless they respond
to all parts of the Department’s AD
questionnaire as mandatory
respondents. The Department requires
that the PRC respondents submit a
response to the separate rate application
by the deadline referenced above in
order to receive consideration for
separate rate status.
Use of Combination Rates
The Department will calculate
combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a
separate rate in an NME investigation.
The Separate Rates and Combination
Rates Bulletin states:
{w}hile continuing the practice of assigning
separate rates only to exporters, all separate
rates that the Department will now assign in
its NME investigations will be specific to
those producers that supplied the exporter
during the period of investigation. Note,
however, that one rate is calculated for the
exporter and all of the producers which
supplied subject merchandise to it during the
47 See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates
Practice and Application of Combination Rates in
Antidumping Investigation involving Non-Market
Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate Rates
and Combination Rates Bulletin), available on the
Department’s Web site at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/policy/).
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices
period of investigation. This practice applies
both to mandatory respondents receiving an
individually calculated separate rate as well
as the pool of non-investigated firms
receiving the weighted-average of the
individually calculated rates. This practice is
referred to as the application of ‘‘combination
rates’’ because such rates apply to specific
combinations of exporters and one or more
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to
an exporter will apply only to merchandise
both exported by the firm in question and
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter
during the period of investigation.48
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the Petition have been provided to
the Government of the PRC. Because of
the particularly large number of
producers/exporters identified in the
Petition, the Department considers the
service of the public version of the
Petition to the foreign producers/
exporters to be satisfied by the provision
of the public version of the Petition to
the Government of the PRC, consistent
with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We notified the ITC of our initiation,
as required by section 732(d) of the Act.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 25 days after the date on which
the ITC receives notice from the
Department of initiation of the
investigation, whether there is a
reasonable indication that imports of
certain passenger tires from the PRC are
materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, a U.S. industry.49 A
negative ITC determination will result
in the investigation being terminated.50
Otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department
published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for
Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10,
2013), which modified two regulations
related to AD and CVD proceedings: (1)
The definition of factual information (19
CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and (2) the time
limits for the submission of factual
information (19 CFR 351.301). The final
rule identifies five categories of factual
information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21),
which are summarized as follows: (i)
48 See Separate Rates and Combination Rates
Bulletin at 6 (emphasis added).
49 See section 733(a) of the Act.
50 Id.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jul 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
Evidence submitted in response to
questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted
in support of allegations; (iii) publicly
available information to value factors
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure
the adequacy of remuneration under 19
CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed
on the record by the Department; and (v)
evidence other than factual information
described in (i)–(iv). The final rule
requires any party, when submitting
factual information, to specify under
which subsection of 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21) the information is being
submitted and, if the information is
submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct
factual information already on the
record, to provide an explanation
identifying the information already on
the record that the factual information
seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The
final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301
so that, rather than providing general
time limits, there are specific time limits
based on the type of factual information
being submitted. These modifications
are effective for all proceeding segments
initiated on or after May 10, 2013, and
thus are applicable to this investigation.
Please review the final rule, available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/
1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to
submitting factual information for this
investigation.
Extension of Time Limits
On September 20, 2013, the
Department published Extension of
Time Limits, Final Rule,51 which
modified one regulation related to AD
and CVD proceedings regarding the
extension of time limits for submissions
in such proceedings (19 CFR
351.302(c)). These modifications are
effective for all segments initiated on or
after October 21, 2013, and thus are
applicable to this investigation. Please
review the final rule, available at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201309-20/html/2013-22853.htm prior to
requesting an extension.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.52
Parties are hereby reminded that the
Department issued a final rule with
respect to certification requirements,
effective August 16, 2013 and that the
revised certification requirements are in
effect for company/government officials
as well as their representatives. All
segments of any AD or CVD proceedings
initiated on or after August 16, 2013,
51 See
52 See
PO 00000
78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013).
section 782(b) of the Act.
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42297
including this investigation, should use
the formats for the revised certifications
provided at the end of the Final Rule.53
The Department intends to reject factual
submissions if the submitting party does
not comply with the applicable revised
certification requirements.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under
administrative protective order (APO) in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b).
Instructions for filing such applications
may be found on the Department’s Web
site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/
apo/.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: July 14, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix—Scope of the Investigation
The scope of this investigation is passenger
vehicle and light truck tires. Passenger
vehicle and light truck tires are new
pneumatic tires, of rubber, with a passenger
vehicle or light truck size designation. Tires
covered by this investigation may be tubetype, tubeless, radial, or non-radial, and they
may be intended for sale to original
equipment manufacturers or the replacement
market.
Subject tires have, at the time of
importation, the symbol ‘‘DOT’’ on the
sidewall, certifying that the tire conforms to
applicable motor vehicle safety standards.
Subject tires may also have the following
prefixes or suffix in their tire size
designation, which also appears on the
sidewall of the tire:
Prefix designations:
P—Identifies a tire intended primarily for
service on passenger cars.
LT—Identifies a tire intended primarily for
service on light trucks.
Suffix letter designations:
LT—Identifies light truck tires for service
on trucks, buses, trailers, and multipurpose
passenger vehicles used in nominal highway
service.
All tires with a ‘‘P’’ or ‘‘LT’’ prefix, and all
tires with an ‘‘LT’’ suffix in their sidewall
markings are covered by this investigation
regardless of their intended use.
In addition, all tires that lack a ‘‘P’’ or ‘‘LT’’
prefix or suffix in their sidewall markings, as
well as all tires that include any other prefix
or suffix in their sidewall markings, are
included in the scope, regardless of their
intended use, as long as the tire is of a size
that is among the numerical size designations
53 See Certification of Factual Information To
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July
17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also the frequently asked
questions regarding the Final Rule, available at the
following: https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/
notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
42298
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 139 / Monday, July 21, 2014 / Notices
listed in the passenger car section or light
truck section of the Tire and Rim Association
Year Book, as updated annually.
Passenger vehicle and light truck tires,
whether or not attached to wheels or rims,
are included in the scope. However, if a
subject tire is imported attached to a wheel
or rim, only the tire is covered by the scope.
Specifically excluded from the scope of
this investigation are the following types of
tires: (1) Racing car tires, defined as tires for
use exclusively on a race track; such tires do
not bear the symbol ‘‘DOT’’ on the sidewall;
(2) new pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a size
that is not listed in the passenger car section
or light truck section of the Tire and Rim
Association Year Book; (3) pneumatic tires,
of rubber, that are not new, including
recycled and retreaded tires; and (4) nonpneumatic tires, such as solid rubber tires.
The products covered by the investigation
are currently classified under the following
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4011.10.10.10,
4011.10.10.20, 4011.10.10.30, 4011.10.10.40,
4011.10.10.50, 4011.10.10.60, 4011.10.10.70,
4011.10.50.00, 4011.20.10.05, and
4011.20.50.10. Tires meeting the scope
description may also enter under the
following HTSUS subheadings:
4011.99.45.00, 4011.99.85.00, 8708.70.45.45,
8708.70.45.60, 8708.70.60.30, 8708.70.60.45,
and 8708.70.60.60. While HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience
and for customs purposes, the written
description of the subject merchandise is
dispositive.
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration,
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments.
Plan contains objective, measurable
delisting criteria, site-specific
management actions necessary to
achieve the Proposed Plan’s goals, and
estimates of the time and costs required
to implement recovery actions. We are
soliciting review and comment from the
public and all interested parties on the
Proposed Plan.
DATES: We will consider and address, as
appropriate, all substantive comments
received during the comment period.
Comments on the Proposed Plan must
be received no later than 5 p.m. Pacific
daylight time on September 19, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Please send written
comments and materials to Rosemary
Furfey, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard,
Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232.
Comments may also be submitted by
email to:
nmfs.wcr.snakeriversockeyeplan@
noaa.gov. Please include ‘‘Comments on
Snake River Sockeye Salmon Recovery
Plan’’ in the subject line of the email.
Comments may be submitted via
facsimile (fax) to (503) 230–5441.
Electronic copies of the Proposed Plan
are available on the NMFS Web site at
https://
www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/
protected_species/salmon_steelhead/
recovery_planning_and_
implementation/snake_river/snake_
river_salmon_recovery_
subdomain.html. Persons wishing to
obtain an electronic copy on CD–ROM
of the Proposed Plan may do so by
calling Marcella LaFayette at (503) 231–
2202 or by emailing a request to
marcella.lafayette@noaa.gov with the
subject line ‘‘CD–ROM Request for
Snake River Sockeye Salmon Recovery
Plan.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rosemary Furfey, NMFS Snake River
Sockeye Salmon Recovery Coordinator,
at (503) 231–2149, or rosemary.furfey@
noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
We, NMFS, announce that the
Proposed Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Recovery Plan for Snake River Sockeye
Salmon (Proposed Plan) is available for
public review and comment. The
Proposed Plan addresses the Snake
River Sockeye Salmon (Onchorhynchus
nerka) evolutionarily significant unit
(ESU) listed as endangered under the
ESA. The geographic area covered by
the Proposed Plan is the Sawtooth
Valley in Idaho including the Upper
Salmon River and its tributaries, Stanley
Lake, Redfish Lake, Yellowbelly Lake,
Pettit Lake, and Alturas Lake. As
required under the ESA, the Proposed
Background
We are responsible for developing and
implementing recovery plans for Pacific
salmon and steelhead listed under the
ESA of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.). Recovery means that the
listed species and their ecosystems are
sufficiently restored, and their future
secured, to the point that the protections
of the ESA are no longer necessary.
Section 4(f)(1) of the ESA requires that
recovery plans include, to the extent
practicable: (1) Objective, measurable
criteria which, when met, would result
in a determination that the species is no
longer threatened or endangered; (2)
[FR Doc. 2014–17111 Filed 7–18–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XD367
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Recovery Plans
AGENCY:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 Jul 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
site-specific management actions
necessary to achieve the plan’s goals;
and (3) estimates of the time required
and costs to implement recovery
actions. The ESA requires the
development of recovery plans for each
listed species unless such a plan would
not promote its recovery.
We believe it is essential to have local
support of recovery plans by those
whose activities directly affect the listed
species and whose continued
commitment and leadership will be
needed to implement the necessary
recovery actions. We therefore support
and participate in locally led,
collaborative efforts to develop recovery
plans that involve state, tribal, and
federal entities, local communities, and
other stakeholders. For this Proposed
Plan for endangered Snake River
Sockeye Salmon, we worked
collaboratively with local state, tribal,
and Federal partners to produce a
recovery plan that satisfies the ESA
requirements. We have determined that
this Proposed ESA Recovery Plan for
Snake River Sockeye Salmon meets the
statutory requirements for a recovery
plan and are proposing to adopt it as the
ESA recovery plan for this endangered
species. Section 4(f) of the ESA, as
amended in 1988, requires that public
notice and an opportunity for public
review and comment be provided prior
to final approval of a recovery plan.
This notice solicits comments on this
Proposed Plan.
Development of the Proposed Plan
For the purpose of recovery planning
for the ESA-listed species of Pacific
salmon and steelhead in Idaho, Oregon
and Washington, NMFS designated five
geographically based ‘‘recovery
domains.’’ The Snake River Sockeye
Salmon ESU spawning range is in the
Interior Columbia domain. For each
domain, NMFS appointed a team of
scientists, nominated for their
geographic and species expertise, to
provide a solid scientific foundation for
recovery plans. The Interior Columbia
Technical Recovery Team included
biologists from NMFS, other federal
agencies, states, tribes, and academic
institutions.
A primary task for the Interior
Columbia Technical Recovery Team was
to recommend criteria for determining
when each component population with
an ESU or distinct population segment
(DPS) should be considered viable (i.e.,
when they are have a low risk of
extinction over a 100-year period) and
when ESUs or DPSs have a risk of
extinction consistent with no longer
needing the protections of the ESA. All
Technical Recovery Teams used the
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 139 (Monday, July 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42292-42298]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17111]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-016]
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's
Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective: July 21, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni Page and Emily Halle, Office VII,
AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
1398 and (202) 482-0176, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On June 3, 2014, the Department of Commerce (Department) received
an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of certain
passenger vehicle and light truck tires (certain passenger tires) from
the People's
[[Page 42293]]
Republic of China (PRC), officially filed in proper form on behalf of
the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy,
Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC
(Petitioner).\1\ The AD Petition was accompanied by a countervailing
duty (CVD) petition concerning imports of certain passenger tires from
the PRC. Petitioner is a recognized union, which represents the
domestic industry engaged in the manufacture of passenger vehicle tires
in the United States. On June 6, 2014, the Department requested
additional information and clarification of certain areas of the
Petition,\2\ and on June 10, 2014, Petitioner filed responses to these
requests.\3\ On June 23 and July 7, 2014, Petitioner filed supplemental
submissions to clarify the scope of the investigation.\4\ Because it
was not clear from the Petitions whether the industry support criteria
had been met, the Department extended the time for initiating this
investigation in order to further examine the issue of industry support
by 20 additional days.\5\ The extended initiation determination date of
July 13, 2014, falls on a Sunday, a non-business day, so the
Department's initiation determination is due no later than July 14,
2014, the next business day.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on
Imports of Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the
People's Republic of China,'' (June 3, 2014) (Petition).
\2\ See Letter to Petitioner, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic
of China: Supplemental Questions,'' June 6, 2014 (General Issues
Supplemental Questions).
\3\ See Letter from Petitioner ``Certain Passenger Vehicle and
Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China--Petitioner's
Response to the Department's June 6, 2014 Supplemental Questions--
Antidumping,'' June 10, 2014 (AD Supplement); see also ``Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic
of China--Petitioner's Response to the Department's June 6, 2014
Supplemental Questions regarding General Issues,'' June 10, 2014
(General Issues Supplement).
\4\ See Letter from Petitioner, ``Certain Passenger Vehicle and
Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China--Petitioner's
Scope Clarification Request,'' June 23, 2014 (Scope Supplement); see
also Petitioner's filing ``Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck
Tires from the People's Republic of China--Petitioner's Second Scope
Clarification Request,'' July 7, 2014 (Second Scope Supplement).
\5\ See Notice of Extension of the Deadline for Determining the
Adequacy of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions:
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's
Republic of China, 79 FR 35725 (June 24, 2014).
\6\ See Notice of Clarification: Application of ``Next Business
Day'' Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to
the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005) (Next
Business Day Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), Petitioner alleges that imports of certain passenger
tires from the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United
States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the
Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent
with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is accompanied by
information reasonably available to Petitioner in support of its
allegations.
The Department finds that Petitioner filed the Petition on behalf
of the domestic industry because Petitioner is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(D) of the Act, and has demonstrated
sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the AD
investigation that it is requesting.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition''
section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Investigation
Because the Petition was filed on June 3, 2014, the period of
investigation (POI) is October 1, 2013, through March 31, 2014.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this investigation is certain passenger
tires from the PRC. For a full description of the scope of the
investigation, see the ``Scope of the Investigation'' at the Appendix
of this notice.
Comments on the Scope of the Investigation
During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions
to, and received responses from, Petitioner pertaining to the proposed
scope in order to ensure that the language of the scope is an accurate
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking
relief.\9\ As discussed in the Preamble to the Department's
regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage (scope).\10\ The period for
scope comments is intended to provide the Department with ample
opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with parties prior
to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments
include factual information,\11\ all such factual information should be
limited to public information. All such comments must be filed by 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time (EDT) on August 4, 2014, which is 20 calendar days
from the signature date of this notice.\12\ Any rebuttal comments,
which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on
August 14, 2014, which is 10 calendar days after the initial comments.
The Department requests that any factual information the parties
consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during
this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the
investigation may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and
request permission to submit the additional information. All such
comments must be filed on the records of the AD investigation, as well
as the concurrent CVD investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire; see also
General Issues Supplement at 2-5 and Exhibits I-SQ-2 through I-SQ-6;
Scope Supplement at 2-3 and Exhibit 1; see also Second Scope
Supplement at 2 and Exhibit 1.
\10\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties (Final Rule);
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21).
\12\ As 20 days from the signature date will be Saturday August
2, 2014, the next business day for filing comments will be Monday
August 4, 2014. See Next Business Day Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filing Requirements
All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). An electronically
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by 5:00
p.m. ET on the date specified by the Department. Documents excepted
from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually
(i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets
Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the
date and time of receipt by the applicable deadline.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1); see also Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6,
2011) for details of the Department's electronic filing
requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information
on help using IA ACCESS can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on the Product Characteristics for the AD Questionnaire
The Department requests comments from interested parties regarding
the appropriate physical characteristics of certain passenger tires to
be reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaire. This
information will be used to identify the key physical
[[Page 42294]]
characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to report the
relevant factors of production accurately, as well as to develop
appropriate product-comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they believe are relevant to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically, interested parties may provide
comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1)
General product characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We
note that it is not always appropriate to use all product
characteristics as product-comparison criteria. We base product-
comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among
products. In other words, while there may be some physical product
characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe certain passenger
tires, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take
into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In
addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the
physical characteristics should be used in matching products.
Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important physical
characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD questionnaire, we must receive comments
on product characteristics no later than August 4, 2014. Rebuttal
comments must be received no later than August 14, 2014. All comments
and submissions to the Department must be filed electronically using IA
ACCESS, as referenced above.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC),
which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry''
has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product,\14\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department's
determination is subject to limitations of time and information.
Although this may result in different definitions of the like product,
such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary
to law.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\15\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
Petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioner does not offer
a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of the
investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on
the record, we determine that certain passenger vehicle and light truck
tires, as defined in the scope of the investigation, constitute a
single domestic like product and we analyzed industry support in terms
of that domestic like product.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's
Republic of China (AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II,
Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Petitions Covering Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck
Tires from the People's Republic of China (Attachment II). This
checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file
electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to documents filed via IA
ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room
7046 of the main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 12, 2014, we received comments on industry support from the
Sub-Committee of Tire Producers of the China Chamber of Commerce of
Metals, Minerals & Chemical Importers and the China Rubber Industry
Association.\17\ Petitioner responded to these comments on June 16 and
17, 2014.\18\ In a meeting on July 8, 2014, the Government of the PRC
also commented on industry support for the Petition.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Letter, ``Request to Poll the Domestic Industry to
Determine Petitioner Standing: Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light
Truck Tires from China,'' June 12, 2014.
\18\ See Letter from Petitioner, ``Certain Passenger Vehicle and
Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China--Petitioner's
Response to CCCMC and CRIA's Request to Poll the Industry,'' June
16, 2014; see also Letter from Petitioner, ``Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China--
Additional Information in Response to CCCMC and CRIA's Request to
Poll the Industry,'' June 17, 2014.
\19\ See Memorandum, ``Antidumping Duty Investigation of
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane from the People's Republic of China and
the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions for Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic
of China: Meeting with Officials from the Government of the People's
Republic of China,'' July 9, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 17, 2014, the Department extended the initiation deadline
by 20 days to poll the domestic industry in accordance with section
732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, because it was ``not clear from the Petitions
whether the industry support criteria have been met. . . .'' \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Notice of Extension of the Deadline for Determining the
Adequacy of the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Petitions:
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's
Republic of China, 79 FR 35725, 35726 (June 24, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 20, 2014, we issued polling questionnaires to all known
producers of certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires in the
United States, identified in the Petition and by the ITC, as well as
all known unions, employee organizations, or ad hoc groups of
workers.\21\ We requested that the companies/workers complete the
polling questionnaire and certify their responses by the due date
specified in the cover letter to the questionnaire.\22\ Petitioner
provided comments on the polling questionnaire responses on July 8,
2014.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck
Tires from the People's Republic of China: Polling Questionnaire,''
June 20, 2014.
\22\ For a detailed discussion of the responses received, see AD
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. The polling questionnaire and
questionnaire responses are on file electronically via IA ACCESS and
can also be accessed through the CRU.
\23\ See Letter from Petitioner, ``Certain Passenger Vehicle and
Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China--Petitioner's
Comments on Polling Responses,'' July 8, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42295]]
Our analysis of the data we received in the polling questionnaire
responses indicates that the domestic producers and workers that
support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product and more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petition.\24\
Accordingly, the Department determines that the industry support
requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act have been met.
Therefore, the Department determines that Petitioner filed this
Petition on behalf of the domestic industry in accordance with section
732(b)(1) of the Act because it is an interested party as defined in
section 771(9)(D) of the Act and it demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the AD investigation that it is requesting the
Department initiate.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
Petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic
like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with
material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise
sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, Petitioner alleges
that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Volume I of the Petition at I-18 and Exhibit I-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression
or suppression; lost sales and revenues; direct replacement of domestic
shipments by subject imports; decline in shipments, reduced sales
volumes, and production curtailments; decline in capacity utilization
and reduced capacity allocated to U.S. production of certain passenger
tires; decline in employment; adverse impact on union contract
negotiations; and adverse impact on financial performance.\27\ We
assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material
injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we determined
that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and
meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-15 through I-57 and
Exhibits I-2, I-3, and I-12 through I-53; see also General Issues
Supplement at 1 and Exhibit I-SQ-1.
\28\ See AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic
of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to
initiate an investigation of imports of certain passenger tires from
the PRC. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments
relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the AD
Initiation Checklist.
Export Price
Petitioner based export price (EP) on import data obtained from the
U.S. Department of Commerce's Foreign Trade Division Merchandise
Imports database (Imports database) for certain passenger tires.
Petitioner calculated the average unit values (AUVs) per kilogram for
U.S. imports of certain passenger tires from the PRC entered during the
POI under ten Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
subheadings that cover certain passenger tires. As the Import database
import values reflect customs values and therefore exclude U.S. import
duties, freight, and insurance, Petitioner made adjustments to deduct
unrebated value added tax, foreign inland freight, and brokerage and
handling at port of exportation to derive a U.S. net price.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Volume II of the Petition at II-6 through II-7; AD
Supplement at Exhibit II-SQ-16; and AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
Petitioner states that the Department has treated the PRC as a non-
market economy (NME) country in every proceeding in which the PRC has
been involved.\30\ The presumption of NME status for the PRC has not
been revoked by the Department and, therefore, in accordance with
section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, remains in effect for purposes of the
initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product
for the investigation is appropriately based on factors of production
(FOPs) valued in a surrogate market-economy country in accordance with
section 773(c) of the Act. In the course of this investigation, all
parties will have the opportunity to provide relevant information
related to the issues of the PRC's NME status and granting of separate
rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Volume II of the Petition at II-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner contends that Thailand is the appropriate surrogate
country for the PRC because: (1) It is at a level of economic
development comparable to that of the PRC; (2) it is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise; and (3) the data for Thailand for
valuing factors of production are available and reliable.\31\ Based on
the information provided by Petitioner, we conclude that it is
appropriate to use Thailand as a surrogate country for initiation
purposes.\32\ After initiation of this investigation, interested
parties will have the opportunity to submit comments regarding
surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i),
will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly available
information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled date of
the preliminary determination.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Id. at II-2 through II-6 and Exhibits II-1 through II-4.
\32\ See AD Initiation Checklist.
\33\ See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i). Note that this is the revised
regulation published on April 10, 2013. See https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner calculated NV using the Department's NME methodology as
required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 351.408. As
Petitioner is a union representing workers in the domestic industry
producing certain passenger tires and is not a domestic producer,
Petitioner contends it does not have access to the proprietary
information on the factors of production necessary to make certain
passenger tires. Therefore, Petitioner based NV on publicly available
information regarding the standard direct materials used to manufacture
certain passenger tires from a number of publications.\34\ Petitioner
asserts that the publicly available raw material models it provided are
representative, to the best of its knowledge, of the average makeup of
certain passenger tires.\35\ Using this information, Petitioner
calculated the average percentage of total tire weight represented by
each direct material for passenger car tires and for light truck tires.
The information regarding the percentages of direct materials used to
make a subject tire were applied to the average tire weight for each of
the ten HTSUS categories of certain passenger tires obtained from the
Imports database to calculate the average amount of each
[[Page 42296]]
direct material used in the manufacture of the subject merchandise.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Volume II of the Petition at II-8 through II-10 and
Exhibits II-10 through II-21; see also AD Supplement at 3-5.
\35\ Id.
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner valued the FOPs using reasonably available, public
surrogate country data, specifically, Thai import data from the Global
Trade Atlas (GTA) for the period October 2013 through March 2014.\37\
Petitioner excluded from these GTA import statistics imports from
countries previously determined by the Department to be NME countries,
countries previously determined by the Department to maintain broadly
available, non-industry-specific export subsidies, and, in accordance
with the Department's practice, any imports that were labeled as
originating from an ``unspecified'' country.\38\ Petitioner valued most
of the direct material inputs (synthetic rubber, fillers, compounding
ingredients, reinforcing materials, scrap, and alternative materials)
using GTA Thai import data.\39\ Petitioner valued natural rubber using
information from the Rubber Research Institute of Thailand. \40\ The
Department determines that the surrogate values used by Petitioner are
reasonably available and, thus, are acceptable for purposes of
initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See Volume II of the Petition at II-10 and Exhibit II-23.
\38\ Id. at II-10 through II-11.
\39\ Id. at Exhibit II-23.
\40\ Id. at Exhibit II-24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner calculated the average labor hours required to make one
tire using the employment and production information from the financial
statements of three PRC tire manufacturers (GITI Tire, Doublestar Tyre,
and Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd.).\41\ Petitioner then used the weight-
averaged amount of the three labor rates to determine an overall
average of labor hours required to make one subject tire. Petitioner
calculated the average hourly labor rate for an employee producing
tires using a 2007 Thailand wage rate from the National Statistics
Office's 2007 Industrial Census, and adjusted this rate for inflation
using the consumer price index (CPI) data for Thailand published by the
International Financial Statistics (IFS) and converted it to USD using
the POI average exchange rate.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Id. at II-14 and Exhibits II-25 through II-26; see also AD
Supplement at 5-9 and Exhibits II-SQ-3, II-SQ-5, and II-SQ-6.
\42\ See Volume II of the Petition at II-14 through II-15 and
Exhibits II-27, II-32, and II-33; see also AD Supplement at 10 and
Exhibit II-SQ-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petitioner calculated financial ratios (i.e., factory overhead
expenses, selling, general, and administrative expenses, and profit)
based on the 2013 year-end financial statements of Goodyear (Thailand)
Public Company Limited (Goodyear) and Hwa Fong Rubber (Thailand) Public
Company Limited (Hwa Fong), Thai manufacturers of tires, for the year
ending December 31, 2013.\43\ Because information provided by
Petitioner indicates that Hwa Fong produces bicycle and motorcycle
tires, which are not subject merchandise, while Goodyear produces
certain passenger tires, we are only relying on Goodyear's financial
statements for financial ratios.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See Volume II of the Petition at II-15 through II-16 and
Exhibits II-29 and II-30; see also AD Supplement at 10-13 and
Exhibits II-SQ-13 through II-SQ-17.
\44\ See AD Initiation Checklist under the ``Adjustments to
Normal Value'' section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by Petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of certain passenger tires from the PRC are being,
or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value.
Based on the comparison of net U.S. price to NV for the same or similar
passenger tires in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act,
Petitioner's estimated margins for certain passenger tires ranged from
45.80 to 87.99 percent.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See AD Supplement at Exhibit II-SQ-17 (chart titled
``Weighted average labor rate; original Goodyear financial ratios
only (profit reduced)'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of AD Investigation
Based on our examination of the Petition on certain passenger tires
from the PRC, the Department finds that the Petition meets the
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an
AD investigation to determine whether imports of certain passenger
tires from the PRC are being, or likely to be, sold in the United
States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our
preliminary determination no later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation. For a discussion of evidence supporting our initiation
determination, see the AD Initiation Checklist which accompanies this
notice.
Respondent Selection
In accordance with our standard practice for respondent selection
in AD investigations involving NME countries, we intend to issue
quantity and value questionnaires to each potential respondent named in
the Petition,\46\ and will base respondent selection on the responses
received. In addition, the Department will post the quantity and value
questionnaire along with the filing instructions on the Enforcement and
Compliance Web site (https://trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp). Exporters
and producers of certain passenger tires from the PRC that do not
receive quantity and value questionnaires via mail may still submit a
quantity and value response, and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement
and Compliance Web site. The quantity and value questionnaire must be
submitted by all PRC exporters/producers no later than August 1, 2014.
All quantity and value questionnaires must be filed electronically
using IA ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate rate status in an NME AD investigation,
exporters and producers must submit a separate rate application.\47\
The specific requirements for submitting the separate rate application
in the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application
itself, which will be available on the Department's Web site at https://trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp on the date of publication of this
initiation notice in the Federal Register. The separate rate
application will be due 60 days after the publication of this
initiation notice. For exporters and producers who submit a separate
rate status application and have been selected as mandatory
respondents, these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible
for consideration for separate rate status unless they respond to all
parts of the Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents.
The Department requires that the PRC respondents submit a response to
the separate rate application by the deadline referenced above in order
to receive consideration for separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate
Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin), available on the Department's
Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Combination Rates
The Department will calculate combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME
investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin
states:
{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now
assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those producers
that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note,
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the
[[Page 42297]]
period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory
respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as
well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-
average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is
referred to as the application of ``combination rates'' because such
rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply
only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of
investigation.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin at 6
(emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition have been
provided to the Government of the PRC. Because of the particularly
large number of producers/exporters identified in the Petition, the
Department considers the service of the public version of the Petition
to the foreign producers/exporters to be satisfied by the provision of
the public version of the Petition to the Government of the PRC,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 25 days after the date
on which the ITC receives notice from the Department of initiation of
the investigation, whether there is a reasonable indication that
imports of certain passenger tires from the PRC are materially
injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.\49\ A
negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being
terminated.\50\ Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\50\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission of Factual Information
On April 10, 2013, the Department published Definition of Factual
Information and Time Limits for Submission of Factual Information:
Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 2013), which modified two
regulations related to AD and CVD proceedings: (1) The definition of
factual information (19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and (2) the time limits
for the submission of factual information (19 CFR 351.301). The final
rule identifies five categories of factual information in 19 CFR
351.102(b)(21), which are summarized as follows: (i) Evidence submitted
in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of
allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors
under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration
under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by the
Department; and (v) evidence other than factual information described
in (i)-(iv). The final rule requires any party, when submitting factual
information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)
the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted
to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the
record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already
on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or
correct. The final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 so that, rather
than providing general time limits, there are specific time limits
based on the type of factual information being submitted. These
modifications are effective for all proceeding segments initiated on or
after May 10, 2013, and thus are applicable to this investigation.
Please review the final rule, available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to
submitting factual information for this investigation.
Extension of Time Limits
On September 20, 2013, the Department published Extension of Time
Limits, Final Rule,\51\ which modified one regulation related to AD and
CVD proceedings regarding the extension of time limits for submissions
in such proceedings (19 CFR 351.302(c)). These modifications are
effective for all segments initiated on or after October 21, 2013, and
thus are applicable to this investigation. Please review the final
rule, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm prior to requesting an extension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\52\
Parties are hereby reminded that the Department issued a final rule
with respect to certification requirements, effective August 16, 2013
and that the revised certification requirements are in effect for
company/government officials as well as their representatives. All
segments of any AD or CVD proceedings initiated on or after August 16,
2013, including this investigation, should use the formats for the
revised certifications provided at the end of the Final Rule.\53\ The
Department intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting
party does not comply with the applicable revised certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\53\ See Certification of Factual Information To Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also the
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
the following: https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
administrative protective order (APO) in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on
the Department's Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/apo/.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: July 14, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--Scope of the Investigation
The scope of this investigation is passenger vehicle and light
truck tires. Passenger vehicle and light truck tires are new
pneumatic tires, of rubber, with a passenger vehicle or light truck
size designation. Tires covered by this investigation may be tube-
type, tubeless, radial, or non-radial, and they may be intended for
sale to original equipment manufacturers or the replacement market.
Subject tires have, at the time of importation, the symbol
``DOT'' on the sidewall, certifying that the tire conforms to
applicable motor vehicle safety standards. Subject tires may also
have the following prefixes or suffix in their tire size
designation, which also appears on the sidewall of the tire:
Prefix designations:
P--Identifies a tire intended primarily for service on passenger
cars.
LT--Identifies a tire intended primarily for service on light
trucks.
Suffix letter designations:
LT--Identifies light truck tires for service on trucks, buses,
trailers, and multipurpose passenger vehicles used in nominal
highway service.
All tires with a ``P'' or ``LT'' prefix, and all tires with an
``LT'' suffix in their sidewall markings are covered by this
investigation regardless of their intended use.
In addition, all tires that lack a ``P'' or ``LT'' prefix or
suffix in their sidewall markings, as well as all tires that include
any other prefix or suffix in their sidewall markings, are included
in the scope, regardless of their intended use, as long as the tire
is of a size that is among the numerical size designations
[[Page 42298]]
listed in the passenger car section or light truck section of the
Tire and Rim Association Year Book, as updated annually.
Passenger vehicle and light truck tires, whether or not attached
to wheels or rims, are included in the scope. However, if a subject
tire is imported attached to a wheel or rim, only the tire is
covered by the scope.
Specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation are
the following types of tires: (1) Racing car tires, defined as tires
for use exclusively on a race track; such tires do not bear the
symbol ``DOT'' on the sidewall; (2) new pneumatic tires, of rubber,
of a size that is not listed in the passenger car section or light
truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book; (3)
pneumatic tires, of rubber, that are not new, including recycled and
retreaded tires; and (4) non-pneumatic tires, such as solid rubber
tires.
The products covered by the investigation are currently
classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4011.10.10.10, 4011.10.10.20,
4011.10.10.30, 4011.10.10.40, 4011.10.10.50, 4011.10.10.60,
4011.10.10.70, 4011.10.50.00, 4011.20.10.05, and 4011.20.50.10.
Tires meeting the scope description may also enter under the
following HTSUS subheadings: 4011.99.45.00, 4011.99.85.00,
8708.70.45.45, 8708.70.45.60, 8708.70.60.30, 8708.70.60.45, and
8708.70.60.60. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience
and for customs purposes, the written description of the subject
merchandise is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2014-17111 Filed 7-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
