Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 61291-61295 [2014-24275]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 197 / Friday, October 10, 2014 / Notices
demonstrates changed circumstances
sufficient to warrant such a review.5
In accordance with the abovereferenced regulation, the Department is
initiating a CCR to determine whether
PPL is the successor-in-interest to PMP.
In determining whether one company is
the successor-in-interest to another, the
Department examines a number of
factors including, but not limited to,
changes in management, production
facilities, supplier relationships, and
customer base.6 While no single factor
or combination of these factors will
necessarily provide a dispositive
indication of a successor-in-interest
relationship, the Department will
generally consider the new company to
be the successor to the previous
company if the new company’s resulting
operation is not materially dissimilar to
that of its predecessor.7 Thus, if the
evidence demonstrates that, with
respect to the production and sale of the
subject merchandise, the new company
operates as the same business entity as
the prior company, the Department will
assign the new company the cash
deposit rate of its predecessor.8
In its August 22, 2014, submission,
PPL provided information to
demonstrate that it is the successor-ininterest to PMP. PPL states that the
company’s management, production
facilities and customer/supplier
relationships have not changed as a
result of its conversion to a private
limited company. To support its claims,
PPL submitted the following
documents: (1) PMP’s partnership deed
from 1986; (2) PPL’s new partnership
deed from 2013; (3) the particulars of
PPL’s capital shares and percent of
shareholdings for each partner; (4) the
certificate of incorporation; (5) the
Memorandum of Association and
Articles of Association of PPL showing
details of the partnership; (6) PMP’s and
PPL’s certificates issued by the Export
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
5 See
19 CFR 351.216(d); see also Notice and
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod From Mexico, 75 FR 67685 (Nov. 3,
2010).
6 See Notice of Initiation and Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances
Review: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From
Thailand, 75 FR 61702, 61703 (Oct. 6, 2010)
(Shrimp from Thailand) (unchanged in Notice of
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review: Certain Frozen Warmwater
Shrimp From Thailand, 75 FR 74684 (Dec. 1, 2010);
Industrial Phosphoric Acid From Israel; Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (Feb. 14, 1994).
7 See Shrimp from Thailand, 75 FR at 61703.
8 Id.; see also Notice of Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67 FR
58 (Jan. 2, 2002); and Ball Bearings and Parts
Thereof from France: Final Results of ChangedCircumstances Review, 75 FR 34688 (June 10, 2010).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Oct 09, 2014
Jkt 235001
61291
Inspection Council of India showing the
same address for the production facility;
(7) a list of the suppliers of PMP before,
and PPL after, the conversion to a
private limited company; (8) a list of the
customers of PMP before, and PPL after,
the conversion; and, (9) a list of the
employees of PMP before, and PPL after,
the conversion.
Based on the evidence on the record,
we preliminarily find that PPL is the
successor-in-interest to PMP. We find
that, while PPL expanded to seven
partners from two after its conversion to
a private limited company, the original
two partners retained a majority stake in
PPL and no managers or other
employees changed as a result of the
conversion.9 As a result, we find that
PPL operates as the same business entity
as PMP. Moreover, PPL: (1) Retained the
same production facility as PMP; 10 (2)
continued to purchase raw shrimp from
a majority of the same suppliers as
PMP; 11 and (3) continued to supply the
same U.S. customers.12 Therefore, we
also find that the production facility,
supplier relationships, and customers
have not changed as a result of PMP’s
conversion to PPL. Thus, we
preliminarily find that PPL should
receive the same AD deposit rate (i.e.,
2.49 percent) with respect to the subject
merchandise as PMP, its predecessor
company.
When it concludes that expedited
action is warranted, the Department
may publish the notice of initiation and
preliminary results for a CCR
concurrently.13 We have determined
that expedition of this CCR is warranted
because we have the information
necessary to make a preliminary finding
already on the record.14 Should our
final results remain the same as these
preliminary results, effective the date of
publication of the final results, we will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection to suspend entries of subject
merchandise produced or exported by
PPL at PMP’s cash deposit rate (i.e., 2.49
percent), effective on the publication
date of our final results.
notice.15 Parties will be notified of the
time and date of any hearing, if
requested. Interested parties may submit
case briefs and/or written comments not
later than 14 days after the publication
of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, and
rebuttals to written comments, which
must be limited to issues raised in such
briefs or comments, may be filed not
later than 21 days after the date of
publication of this notice. Parties who
submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in
this changed circumstance review are
requested to submit with each
argument: (1) A statement of the issue;
and (2) a brief summary of the
argument; and (3) a table of authorities.
Interested parties who wish to comment
on the preliminary results must file
briefs electronically using Enforcement
and Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS).
IA ACCESS is available to registered
users at https://iaaccess.trade.gov. An
electronically-filed document must be
received successfully in its entirety by
the Department’s electronic records
system, IA ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern
Time on the date the document is due.
Consistent with 19 CFR 351.216(e),
we intend to issue the final results of
this changed circumstance review no
later than 270 days after the date on
which this review was initiated, or
within 45 days of publication of these
preliminary results if all parties agree to
our preliminary finding.
We are issuing and publishing this
finding and notice in accordance with
sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.216 and
351.221(c)(3)(ii).
Public Comment
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), any
interested party may request a hearing
within 14 days of publication of this
International Trade Administration
9 See
CCR Request, at 7 and 10.
10 Id.
11 Id.
at 9.
12 Id.
13 See 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii); see also Initiation
and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review: Canned Pineapple
Fruit from Thailand, 69 FR 30878 (June 1, 2004).
14 See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from
Japan: Initiation and Preliminary Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, 71 FR 14679 (Mar.
23, 2006).
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: October 6, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014–24277 Filed 10–9–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A–570–912]
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road
Tires From the People’s Republic of
China: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2012–2013
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
15 See 19 CFR 351.303 for general filing
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
61292
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 197 / Friday, October 10, 2014 / Notices
The Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) is conducting an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain new
pneumatic off-the-road tires (‘‘OTR
tires’’) from the People’s Republic of
China (‘‘PRC’’). The period of review
(‘‘POR’’) is September 1, 2012, through
August 31, 2013. The review covers the
following exporters of subject
merchandise: Mandatory respondents
Double Coin Holdings Ltd. (‘‘Double
Coin’’) 1 and Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd./
Guizhou Tyre Import and Export Co.,
Ltd. (collectively, ‘‘GTC’’), and nonexamined respondents Zhongce Rubber
Group Company Limited (‘‘Zhongce’’),2
Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Zhongwei’’), and Trelleborg Wheel
System (Xingtai) China, Co. Ltd.
(‘‘Trelleborg’’). We preliminarily find
that GTC made sales of subject
merchandise at less than normal value,
Zhongce and Zhongwei are eligible for
a separate rate, Double Coin failed to
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
1 In Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for
Revocation in Part, 78 FR 67104, 67108 (November
8, 2013) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’), the review was
initiated on Double Coin Group Rugao Tyre Co.,
Ltd.—renamed Double Coin Group Jiangsu Tyre
Co., Ltd.—(‘‘DC Rugao/Jiangsu’’), Double Coin
Group Shanghai Donghai Tyre Co., Ltd. (‘‘DC
Donghai’’), and Double Coin Holdings, Ltd. (‘‘DCH’’
or ‘‘Double Coin’’). The respondent in this review
is DCH, which exported all subject merchandise
produced by both its wholly-owned and affiliate
factories during the POR. DC Donghai is an
affiliated producer of subject merchandise that did
not produce OTR tires for export in the POR. See,
e.g., Letter from Double Coin entitled, ‘‘Section A
Response of Double Coin Holdings and China
Manufacturers Alliance, LLC,’’ dated January 22,
2014 (‘‘Double Coin SAQR’’). DC Rugao/Jiangsu is
a majority DCH-owned subsidiary factory which,
along with the 100 percent DCH-owned production
factory (i.e., Double Coin Lorry Tyre Branch, a.k.a.,
Shanghai Heavy Tire), produced the subject
merchandise in question during the POR. Id. The
International Trade Department of DCH is
responsible for all export sales of merchandise
under consideration produced by both DCH’s
Shanghai Heavy Tire factory and the DC Rugao/
Jiangsu factory. Id. Additionally, the China
Manufacturers Alliance (‘‘CMA’’) is DCH’s U.S.
sales affiliate for all POR sales, and has provided
and certified to relevant and requested sales-related
information on behalf of the respondent. Id.
Accordingly, for ease of reference we use ‘‘Double
Coin’’ to collectively refer to each of the above
production, export, and sales entities that comprise
the respondent in this review, but note that DCH
is the actual exporter-respondent. Furthermore, as
discussed below, we have collapsed DCH
(including Shanghai Heavy Tire), DC Rugao/
Jiangsu, and DC Donghai into a single entity for the
purposes of this review.
2 This review was initiated on Hangzhou Zhongce
Rubber Co., Ltd.; however, in the final results of a
changed circumstances review, which was
completed after the instant review initiated, the
Department determined that Zhongce was the
successor-in-interest to Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber
Co., Ltd. See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road
Tires From the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 79 FR 8463 (February 12,
2014).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Oct 09, 2014
Jkt 235001
demonstrate eligibility for separate rate
status and thus has been included in the
PRC-wide entity, and Trelleborg had no
shipments during the POR.
DATES: Effective Date: October 10, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brendan Quinn or Andrew Medley, AD/
CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–5848 or (202) 482–4987,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Scope of the Order 3
The merchandise covered by this
order includes new pneumatic tires
designed for off-the-road and offhighway use, subject to certain
exceptions. The subject merchandise is
currently classifiable under Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings: 4011.20.10.25,
4011.20.10.35, 4011.20.50.30,
4011.20.50.50, 4011.61.00.00,
4011.62.00.00, 4011.63.00.00,
4011.69.00.00, 4011.92.00.00,
4011.93.40.00, 4011.93.80.00,
4011.94.40.00, and 4011.94.80.00. The
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes
only; the written product description of
the scope of the order is dispositive.
Preliminary Determination of No
Shipments
Trelleborg submitted a timely-filed
certification indicating that it had no
shipments of subject merchandise to the
United States during the POR.4
Consistent with its practice, the
Department asked U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to conduct a
query on potential shipments made by
Trelleborg during the POR; CBP did not
provide any evidence that contradicts
Trelleborg’s claim of no shipments.5
Based on Trelleborg’s certification and
our analysis of CBP information, we
preliminarily determine that Trelleborg
3 For a complete description of the scope of the
order, see the Memorandum from Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, entitled, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Certain New Pneumatic
Off-the-Road Tires from the People’s Republic of
China,’’ dated September 30, 2014 (‘‘Preliminary
Decision Memorandum’’).
4 See Letter from Trelleborg, entitled, ‘‘Trelleborg
Wheel Systems (Xingtai) China, Co. Ltd. Statement
of No Shipments during the POR: New Pneumatic
Off-The-Road Tires from the People’s Republic of
China,’’ dated November 20, 2013.
5 See CBP Message Number 3352302, dated
December 18, 2013.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
did not have any reviewable
transactions during the POR. Consistent
with a recently announced refinement
to its assessment practice in non-market
economy (‘‘NME’’) cases, the
Department is not rescinding this
review, in part, but intends to complete
the review with respect to Trelleborg.6
Preliminary Determination of
Affiliation and Collapsing
Based on the evidence presented in
Double Coin’s questionnaire responses,
we preliminarily find that DCH
(including Shanghai Heavy Tire), DC
Rugao/Jiangsu, and DC Donghai are
affiliated, pursuant to section 771(33)(E)
of the Act. In addition, based on the
evidence presented in the questionnaire
responses, we preliminarily find that
DCH (including its Shanghai Heavy Tire
factory), DC Rugao/Jiangsu, and DC
Donghai should be treated as a single
entity for the purposes of this review
(collectively, the ‘‘DCH Single Entity’’).
This finding is based on the
determination that there is significant
potential for manipulation of price
between the parties pursuant to the
criteria laid out in 19 CFR 351.401(f),
due to the high level of common
ownership, interlocking boards and
managers, and intertwined operations.7
Separate Rates
In the Initiation Notice,8 we informed
parties of the opportunity to request a
separate rate. In proceedings involving
NME countries, the Department begins
with a rebuttable presumption that all
companies within the NME country are
subject to government control and, thus,
should be assigned a single weightedaverage dumping margin. It is the
Department’s policy to assign all
exporters of merchandise subject to an
administrative review involving an
NME country this single rate unless an
exporter can demonstrate that it is
sufficiently independent so as to be
entitled to a separate rate. Companies
that wanted to be considered for a
separate rate in this review were
required to timely file a separate-rate
6 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694, 65694–95 (October 24, 2011) and the
‘‘Assessment Rates’’ section, below.
7 For further discussion of the Department’s
affiliation and collapsing decision, see
Memorandum to the File, entitled, ‘‘2012–2013
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty
Order on Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road
Tires from the People’s Republic of China: Double
Coin Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum,’’
dated September 30, 2014 (‘‘Double Coin Affiliation
and Collapsing Memo’’).
8 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and
Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR 67104,
61704–05 (November 8, 2013) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’).
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 197 / Friday, October 10, 2014 / Notices
application or a separate-rate
certification to demonstrate their
eligibility for a separate rate. Separaterate applications and separate-rate
certifications were due to the
Department within 60 calendar days of
the publication of the Initiation Notice.
In this review, all exporters for which
a review was requested submitted
separate-rate information to rebut the
presumption that, like all companies
within the PRC, they are subject to
government control with respect to
export activities. As further discussed in
the Preliminarily Decision
Memorandum,9 we determine that the
mandatory respondent Double Coin has
not demonstrated that it operates free
from government control with respect to
export activities. Thus, we preliminary
determine that Double Coin is part of
the PRC-wide entity.
The remaining mandatory respondent
(i.e., GTC) and non-examined
respondents (i.e., Zhongce and
Zhongwei) submitted sufficient
information for the Department to
preliminarily determine that they are
entitled to a separate rate.10 A full
discussion of the basis for granting these
companies a separate rate can be found
in the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum.
Rate for Non-Examined Companies
Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Normally, the Department’s practice
is to look for guidance from section
735(c)(5)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (‘‘the Act’’), to assign to
separate rate companies that were not
individually examined a rate equal to
the average of the rates calculated for
the individually examined respondents,
9 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum. For
further analysis, including business proprietary
information details, with respect to the denial of
Double Coin’s separate rate, see also the
Department’s memorandum to the File, entitled,
‘‘2012–2013 Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People’s
Republic of China: Analysis of the Preliminary
Results Margin Calculation for Double Coin
Holdings, Ltd.,’’ dated concurrently with this
memorandum.
10 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum. For
further analysis, including business proprietary
information details, with respect to the approval of
GTC’s separate rate request, see also the
Department’s memorandum to the File, entitled,
‘‘2012–2013 Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People’s
Republic of China: Analysis of the Preliminary
Results Margin Calculation for Guizhou Tyre Co.,
Ltd.,’’ dated concurrently with this memorandum.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Oct 09, 2014
Jkt 235001
excluding any rates that are zero, de
minimis, or based entirely on adverse
facts available.11 In this case, one
mandatory respondent, Double Coin, is
preliminarily found to be part of the
PRC-wide entity. The other mandatory
respondent, GTC, is receiving a separate
rate for these preliminary results
calculated from its own sales and
production data. To determine a rate for
the unselected separate rate companies,
we find it appropriate to use the margin
calculated for GTC, which was also
found to be separate from the PRC-wide
entity with respect to its export
activities, and which rate is not zero or
de minimis nor based entirely on facts
available. Therefore, we are
preliminarily assigning GTC’s
calculated margin as the rate assigned to
non-examined entities which have
demonstrated their eligibility for a
separate rate.
PRC-Wide Entity
Double Coin, one of the companies
that the Department selected as a
mandatory respondent in this
administrative review, failed to
demonstrate absence of de facto
government control over export
activities due to the fact that its
controlling shareholder is whollyowned by the State-owned Assets
Supervision and Administration
Commission of the State Council and
the significant level of control this
majority shareholder wields over the
respondent’s Board of Directors.12 As a
result, we preliminarily determine that
Double Coin is part of the PRC-wide
entity.
Because Double Coin provided the
Department with its verified sales and
production data, we are able to calculate
a margin for an unspecified portion of
a single PRC-wide entity, but cannot do
so for the remaining unspecified portion
of the entity. As the Department must
calculate a single margin for the PRCwide government controlled entity and
there is insufficient information on the
record with respect to the composition
11 See, e.g., Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative
Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain
Polyester Staple Fiber from the People’s Republic of
China, 71 FR 77373, 77377 (December 26, 2006),
unchanged in Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative
Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain
Polyester Staple Fiber from the People’s Republic of
China, 72 FR 19690 (April 19, 2007).
12 See ‘‘Separate Rates’’ section of the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
61293
of the PRC-wide entity, we thus
preliminarily calculated a simple
average of the previously assigned PRCwide rate (210.48 percent) 13 and Double
Coin’s calculated margin (0.69 percent)
as the rate applicable to the PRC-wide
entity. Accordingly, the Department
revised the PRC-wide entity rate to
105.59 percent for these preliminary
results. For a further discussion of the
PRC-wide entity rate, see the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
Methodology
The Department conducted this
review in accordance with section
751(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Export and
constructed export prices were
calculated in accordance with sections
772(a) and (b) of the Act. Because the
PRC is a NME within the meaning of
section 771(18) of the Act, the
Department calculated normal value in
accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act.
For a full description of the
methodology underlying our
preliminary results, please see the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum,
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
A list of the topics included in the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum is
attached as an Appendix to this notice.
The Preliminary Decision Memorandum
is a public document and is on file
electronically via Enforcement and
Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (‘‘IA
ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov, and it is available to
all parties in the Central Records Unit,
room 7046 of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the internet at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
The signed Preliminary Decision
Memorandum and the electronic
versions of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Preliminary Results of Review
The Department preliminarily
determines that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist:
13 See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires
from the People’s Republic of China: Final
Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485, 40489 (July
15, 2008) (‘‘LTFV Investigation’’).
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
61294
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 197 / Friday, October 10, 2014 / Notices
Weighted average
dumping margin
Exporter
Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd./Guizhou Tyre Import and Export Co., Ltd.14 .................................................................................
Zhongce Rubber Group Company Limited .........................................................................................................................
Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd. .....................................................................................................................................
PRC-Wide Entity (includes the DCH Single Entity 15) .........................................................................................................
Disclosure and Public Comment
The Department intends to disclose to
the parties the calculations performed
for these preliminary results within five
days of the date of publication of this
notice in accordance with 19 CFR
351.224(b). Interested parties may
submit case briefs no later than 30 days
after the date of publication of these
preliminary results of review.16 Rebuttal
briefs, limited to issues raised in the
case briefs, may be filed no later than
five days after the case briefs are filed.17
Any interested party may request a
hearing within 30 days of publication of
this notice.18 Hearing requests should
contain the following information: (1)
The party’s name, address, and
telephone number; (2) the number of
participants; and (3) a list of the issues
to be discussed. Oral presentations will
be limited to issues raised in the case
and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a
hearing is made, parties will be notified
of the time and date for the hearing to
be held at the U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230.19
Unless otherwise extended, the
Department intends to issue the final
results of this administrative review,
which will include the results of its
analysis of issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs, within 120 days of
publication of these preliminary results,
pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the
Act.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Assessment Rates
Upon issuance of the final results of
this review, the Department will
14 The review was initiated on Guizhou Advance
Rubber Co., Ltd. (‘‘GAR’’), Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd.,
and Guizhou Tyre Import and Export Co., Ltd. See
Initiation Notice, 78 FR at 67108. These three
companies were collapsed into a collective entity,
GTC, in the investigation. See Certain New
Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires From the People’s
Republic of China; Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement
of Final Determination, 73 FR 9278, 9283 (February
20, 2008), unchanged in LTFV Investigation. GAR
does not export subject merchandise; as such, we
have only listed GTC in this section of the notice.
15 As noted above, the review was initiated on
DCH, DC Rugao/Jiangsu), and DC Donghai, and each
company has been preliminarily collapsed and
treated as the DCH Single Entity for the purposes
of this review.
16 See 19 CFR 351.309(c).
17 See 19 CFR 351.309(d).
18 See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
19 See 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Oct 09, 2014
Jkt 235001
determine, and CBP shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries covered by this review.20 The
Department intends to issue appropriate
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after publication of the final results of
this review.
For GTC, whose weighted-average
dumping margin is not zero or de
minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), we
will calculate importer-specific ad
valorem duty assessment rates based on
the ratio of the total amount of dumping
calculated for the importer’s examined
sales to the total entered value of those
same sales in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1).21 For duty assessment
rates calculated on this basis, we will
direct CBP to assess the resulting ad
valorem rate against the entered
customs values for the subject
merchandise. If the weighted-average
dumping margin for the exporter is zero
or de minimis, or if the importerspecific assessment rate is zero or de
minimis, then the Department will
instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate
entries without regard to antidumping
duties.
On October 24, 2011, the Department
announced a refinement to its
assessment practice in NME cases.
Pursuant to this refinement in practice,
for entries that were not reported in the
U.S. sales databases submitted by
companies individually examined
during this review, the Department will
instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at
the PRC-wide rate. In addition, if the
Department determines that an exporter
under review had no shipments of the
subject merchandise, any suspended
entries that entered under that
exporter’s case number (i.e., at that
exporter’s rate) will be liquidated at the
PRC-wide rate.22
In accordance with section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the final results
of this review shall be the basis for the
assessment of antidumping duties on
20 See
19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
these preliminary results, the Department
applied the assessment rate calculation method
adopted in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation
of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping
Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101
(February 14, 2012).
22 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694, 65694–95 (October 24, 2011).
21 In
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16.18
16.18
16.18
105.59
entries of merchandise covered by the
final results of this review and for future
deposits of estimated duties, where
applicable.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements for estimated antidumping
duties, when imposed, will apply to all
shipments of subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication of the final results of this
administrative review, as provided by
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) If the
companies preliminarily determined to
be eligible for a separate rate receive a
separate rate in the final results of this
administrative review, their cash
deposit rate will be equal to the
weighted-average dumping margin
established in the final results of this
review, as adjusted for domestic
subsidies (except, if that rate is de
minimis, then the cash deposit rate will
be zero); (2) for any previously
investigated or reviewed PRC and nonPRC exporter that is not under review in
this segment of the proceeding but that
received a separate rate in the most
recently completed segment of this
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the exporter-specific rate
published for the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding;
(3) for all PRC exporters of subject
merchandise that have not been found
to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash
deposit rate will be equal to the cash
deposit rate for the PRC-wide entity,
which will be equal to the rate assigned
to the PRC-wide entity in the final
results of this administrative review;
and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not
received their own rate, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate applicable to the
PRC exporter(s) that supplied that nonPRC exporter. These cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a
preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 197 / Friday, October 10, 2014 / Notices
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
We are issuing and publishing notice
of these results in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: September 30, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
This meeting will be held on
Tuesday, October 28, 2014 at 9 a.m.
DATES:
ADDRESSES:
Meeting address: The meeting will be
held at the Courtyard by Marriott, 32
Exchange Terrace, Providence, RI
02903; telephone: (401) 272–1191; fax:
(401) 272–1416.
Council address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in
the Preliminary Decision Memorandum
1. Background
2. Scope of the Order
3. Affiliation and Collapsing
4. Preliminary Determination of No
Shipments
5. Non-Market Economy Country
6. Separate Rates
7. Margin for the Separate Rate Companies
8. PRC-Wide Entity
9. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Value
Data
10. Surrogate Country
11. Economic Comparability
12. Significant Producers of Identical or
Comparable Merchandise
13. Data Availability
14. Date of Sale
15. Comparisons to Normal Value
16. Export Price and Constructed Export
Price
17. Value-Added Tax
18. Normal Value
19. Factor Valuations
20. Adjustment Under Section 777A(f) of the
Act
21. Currency Conversion
[FR Doc. 2014–24275 Filed 10–9–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director,
New England Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (978) 465–0492.
The
Advisors will review recommendations
from the Scallop Plan Development
Team for FY 2015 and FY 2016 (default)
fishery specifications (Framework 26).
The Advisors will also provide input on
other measures under consideration in
Framework 26: (1) measures to allow
fishing in state waters after federal
Northern Gulf of Maine (NGOM) TAC is
reached; (2) measures to make turtle
regulations consistent in the scallop
fishery; (3) measures to modify the
existing area closure accountability
measures in place for Georges Bank and
Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic
yellowtail flounder, and develop new
accountability measures for northern
windowpane flounder; and (4) consider
an inshore transit corridor for limited
access scallop vessels to declare out of
the fishery. Other business may be
discussed if time permits.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at
(978) 465–0492, at least 5 days prior to
the meeting date.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XD540
New England Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; public meeting.
Dated: October 7, 2014.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) is
scheduling a public meeting of its
Scallop Advisory Panel on to consider
actions affecting New England fisheries
in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
Recommendations from this group will
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
AGENCY:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
be brought to the full Council for formal
consideration and action, if appropriate.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Oct 09, 2014
Jkt 235001
[FR Doc. 2014–24237 Filed 10–9–14; 8:45 am]
PO 00000
61295
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XD541
New England Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; public meeting.
AGENCY:
The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) is
scheduling a public meeting of its
Scallop Committee on to consider
actions affecting New England fisheries
in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
Recommendations from this group will
be brought to the full Council for formal
consideration and action, if appropriate.
DATES: This meeting will be held on
Wednesday, October 29, 2014 at 9 a.m.
ADDRESSES:
Meeting Address: The meeting will be
held at the Courtyard by Marriott, 32
Exchange Terrace, Providence, RI
02903; telephone: (401) 272–1191; fax:
(401) 272–1416.
Council Address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director,
New England Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (978) 465–0492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Committee will review
recommendations from the Scallop Plan
Development Team for FY 2015 and FY
2016 (default) fishery specifications
(Framework 26). The Committee will
also provide input on other measures
under consideration in Framework 26:
(1) Measures to allow fishing in state
waters after federal Northern Gulf of
Maine (NGOM) TAC is reached; (2)
measures to make turtle regulations
consistent in the scallop fishery; (3)
measures to modify the existing area
closure accountability measures in place
for Georges Bank and Southern New
England/Mid-Atlantic yellowtail
flounder, and develop new
accountability measures for northern
windowpane flounder; and (4) consider
an inshore transit corridor for limited
access scallop vessels to declare out of
the fishery. Other business may be
discussed if time permits.
SUMMARY:
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 197 (Friday, October 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61291-61295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24275]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-912]
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2012-2013
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
[[Page 61292]]
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``Department'') is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain new
pneumatic off-the-road tires (``OTR tires'') from the People's Republic
of China (``PRC''). The period of review (``POR'') is September 1,
2012, through August 31, 2013. The review covers the following
exporters of subject merchandise: Mandatory respondents Double Coin
Holdings Ltd. (``Double Coin'') \1\ and Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd./Guizhou
Tyre Import and Export Co., Ltd. (collectively, ``GTC''), and non-
examined respondents Zhongce Rubber Group Company Limited
(``Zhongce''),\2\ Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd. (``Zhongwei''), and
Trelleborg Wheel System (Xingtai) China, Co. Ltd. (``Trelleborg''). We
preliminarily find that GTC made sales of subject merchandise at less
than normal value, Zhongce and Zhongwei are eligible for a separate
rate, Double Coin failed to demonstrate eligibility for separate rate
status and thus has been included in the PRC-wide entity, and
Trelleborg had no shipments during the POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR
67104, 67108 (November 8, 2013) (``Initiation Notice''), the review
was initiated on Double Coin Group Rugao Tyre Co., Ltd.--renamed
Double Coin Group Jiangsu Tyre Co., Ltd.--(``DC Rugao/Jiangsu''),
Double Coin Group Shanghai Donghai Tyre Co., Ltd. (``DC Donghai''),
and Double Coin Holdings, Ltd. (``DCH'' or ``Double Coin''). The
respondent in this review is DCH, which exported all subject
merchandise produced by both its wholly-owned and affiliate
factories during the POR. DC Donghai is an affiliated producer of
subject merchandise that did not produce OTR tires for export in the
POR. See, e.g., Letter from Double Coin entitled, ``Section A
Response of Double Coin Holdings and China Manufacturers Alliance,
LLC,'' dated January 22, 2014 (``Double Coin SAQR''). DC Rugao/
Jiangsu is a majority DCH-owned subsidiary factory which, along with
the 100 percent DCH-owned production factory (i.e., Double Coin
Lorry Tyre Branch, a.k.a., Shanghai Heavy Tire), produced the
subject merchandise in question during the POR. Id. The
International Trade Department of DCH is responsible for all export
sales of merchandise under consideration produced by both DCH's
Shanghai Heavy Tire factory and the DC Rugao/Jiangsu factory. Id.
Additionally, the China Manufacturers Alliance (``CMA'') is DCH's
U.S. sales affiliate for all POR sales, and has provided and
certified to relevant and requested sales-related information on
behalf of the respondent. Id. Accordingly, for ease of reference we
use ``Double Coin'' to collectively refer to each of the above
production, export, and sales entities that comprise the respondent
in this review, but note that DCH is the actual exporter-respondent.
Furthermore, as discussed below, we have collapsed DCH (including
Shanghai Heavy Tire), DC Rugao/Jiangsu, and DC Donghai into a single
entity for the purposes of this review.
\2\ This review was initiated on Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Co.,
Ltd.; however, in the final results of a changed circumstances
review, which was completed after the instant review initiated, the
Department determined that Zhongce was the successor-in-interest to
Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber Co., Ltd. See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-
Road Tires From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 79 FR 8463 (February
12, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: October 10, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brendan Quinn or Andrew Medley, AD/CVD
Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5848 or (202) 482-4987,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Scope of the Order \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For a complete description of the scope of the order, see
the Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled,
``Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from
the People's Republic of China,'' dated September 30, 2014
(``Preliminary Decision Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The merchandise covered by this order includes new pneumatic tires
designed for off-the-road and off-highway use, subject to certain
exceptions. The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'')
subheadings: 4011.20.10.25, 4011.20.10.35, 4011.20.50.30,
4011.20.50.50, 4011.61.00.00, 4011.62.00.00, 4011.63.00.00,
4011.69.00.00, 4011.92.00.00, 4011.93.40.00, 4011.93.80.00,
4011.94.40.00, and 4011.94.80.00. The HTSUS subheadings are provided
for convenience and customs purposes only; the written product
description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
Preliminary Determination of No Shipments
Trelleborg submitted a timely-filed certification indicating that
it had no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during
the POR.\4\ Consistent with its practice, the Department asked U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to conduct a query on potential
shipments made by Trelleborg during the POR; CBP did not provide any
evidence that contradicts Trelleborg's claim of no shipments.\5\ Based
on Trelleborg's certification and our analysis of CBP information, we
preliminarily determine that Trelleborg did not have any reviewable
transactions during the POR. Consistent with a recently announced
refinement to its assessment practice in non-market economy (``NME'')
cases, the Department is not rescinding this review, in part, but
intends to complete the review with respect to Trelleborg.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Letter from Trelleborg, entitled, ``Trelleborg Wheel
Systems (Xingtai) China, Co. Ltd. Statement of No Shipments during
the POR: New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the People's Republic
of China,'' dated November 20, 2013.
\5\ See CBP Message Number 3352302, dated December 18, 2013.
\6\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65694-95 (October 24, 2011) and
the ``Assessment Rates'' section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preliminary Determination of Affiliation and Collapsing
Based on the evidence presented in Double Coin's questionnaire
responses, we preliminarily find that DCH (including Shanghai Heavy
Tire), DC Rugao/Jiangsu, and DC Donghai are affiliated, pursuant to
section 771(33)(E) of the Act. In addition, based on the evidence
presented in the questionnaire responses, we preliminarily find that
DCH (including its Shanghai Heavy Tire factory), DC Rugao/Jiangsu, and
DC Donghai should be treated as a single entity for the purposes of
this review (collectively, the ``DCH Single Entity''). This finding is
based on the determination that there is significant potential for
manipulation of price between the parties pursuant to the criteria laid
out in 19 CFR 351.401(f), due to the high level of common ownership,
interlocking boards and managers, and intertwined operations.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For further discussion of the Department's affiliation and
collapsing decision, see Memorandum to the File, entitled, ``2012-
2013 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain
New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's Republic of
China: Double Coin Affiliation and Collapsing Memorandum,'' dated
September 30, 2014 (``Double Coin Affiliation and Collapsing
Memo'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In the Initiation Notice,\8\ we informed parties of the opportunity
to request a separate rate. In proceedings involving NME countries, the
Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies
within the NME country are subject to government control and, thus,
should be assigned a single weighted-average dumping margin. It is the
Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to
an administrative review involving an NME country this single rate
unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent
so as to be entitled to a separate rate. Companies that wanted to be
considered for a separate rate in this review were required to timely
file a separate-rate
[[Page 61293]]
application or a separate-rate certification to demonstrate their
eligibility for a separate rate. Separate-rate applications and
separate-rate certifications were due to the Department within 60
calendar days of the publication of the Initiation Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR
67104, 61704-05 (November 8, 2013) (``Initiation Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this review, all exporters for which a review was requested
submitted separate-rate information to rebut the presumption that, like
all companies within the PRC, they are subject to government control
with respect to export activities. As further discussed in the
Preliminarily Decision Memorandum,\9\ we determine that the mandatory
respondent Double Coin has not demonstrated that it operates free from
government control with respect to export activities. Thus, we
preliminary determine that Double Coin is part of the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum. For further analysis,
including business proprietary information details, with respect to
the denial of Double Coin's separate rate, see also the Department's
memorandum to the File, entitled, ``2012-2013 Administrative Review
of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road
Tires from the People's Republic of China: Analysis of the
Preliminary Results Margin Calculation for Double Coin Holdings,
Ltd.,'' dated concurrently with this memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remaining mandatory respondent (i.e., GTC) and non-examined
respondents (i.e., Zhongce and Zhongwei) submitted sufficient
information for the Department to preliminarily determine that they are
entitled to a separate rate.\10\ A full discussion of the basis for
granting these companies a separate rate can be found in the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum. For further analysis,
including business proprietary information details, with respect to
the approval of GTC's separate rate request, see also the
Department's memorandum to the File, entitled, ``2012-2013
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's Republic of China:
Analysis of the Preliminary Results Margin Calculation for Guizhou
Tyre Co., Ltd.,'' dated concurrently with this memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate
Normally, the Department's practice is to look for guidance from
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the
Act''), to assign to separate rate companies that were not individually
examined a rate equal to the average of the rates calculated for the
individually examined respondents, excluding any rates that are zero,
de minimis, or based entirely on adverse facts available.\11\ In this
case, one mandatory respondent, Double Coin, is preliminarily found to
be part of the PRC-wide entity. The other mandatory respondent, GTC, is
receiving a separate rate for these preliminary results calculated from
its own sales and production data. To determine a rate for the
unselected separate rate companies, we find it appropriate to use the
margin calculated for GTC, which was also found to be separate from the
PRC-wide entity with respect to its export activities, and which rate
is not zero or de minimis nor based entirely on facts available.
Therefore, we are preliminarily assigning GTC's calculated margin as
the rate assigned to non-examined entities which have demonstrated
their eligibility for a separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See, e.g., Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's
Republic of China, 71 FR 77373, 77377 (December 26, 2006), unchanged
in Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain
Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China, 72 FR
19690 (April 19, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity
Double Coin, one of the companies that the Department selected as a
mandatory respondent in this administrative review, failed to
demonstrate absence of de facto government control over export
activities due to the fact that its controlling shareholder is wholly-
owned by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration
Commission of the State Council and the significant level of control
this majority shareholder wields over the respondent's Board of
Directors.\12\ As a result, we preliminarily determine that Double Coin
is part of the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See ``Separate Rates'' section of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Double Coin provided the Department with its verified sales
and production data, we are able to calculate a margin for an
unspecified portion of a single PRC-wide entity, but cannot do so for
the remaining unspecified portion of the entity. As the Department must
calculate a single margin for the PRC-wide government controlled entity
and there is insufficient information on the record with respect to the
composition of the PRC-wide entity, we thus preliminarily calculated a
simple average of the previously assigned PRC-wide rate (210.48
percent) \13\ and Double Coin's calculated margin (0.69 percent) as the
rate applicable to the PRC-wide entity. Accordingly, the Department
revised the PRC-wide entity rate to 105.59 percent for these
preliminary results. For a further discussion of the PRC-wide entity
rate, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the
People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485, 40489 (July 15, 2008) (``LTFV
Investigation'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methodology
The Department conducted this review in accordance with section
751(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Export and constructed export prices were
calculated in accordance with sections 772(a) and (b) of the Act.
Because the PRC is a NME within the meaning of section 771(18) of the
Act, the Department calculated normal value in accordance with section
773(c) of the Act.
For a full description of the methodology underlying our
preliminary results, please see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum,
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the topics included
in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an Appendix to
this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document
and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service
System (``IA ACCESS''). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at
https://iaaccess.trade.gov, and it is available to all parties in the
Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce
building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision
Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Preliminary Results of Review
The Department preliminarily determines that the following
weighted-average dumping margins exist:
[[Page 61294]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted average
Exporter dumping margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd./Guizhou Tyre Import and 16.18
Export Co., Ltd.\14\..........................
Zhongce Rubber Group Company Limited........... 16.18
Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd................ 16.18
PRC-Wide Entity (includes the DCH Single Entity 105.59
\15\).........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure and Public Comment
The Department intends to disclose to the parties the calculations
performed for these preliminary results within five days of the date of
publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after
the date of publication of these preliminary results of review.\16\
Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be
filed no later than five days after the case briefs are filed.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The review was initiated on Guizhou Advance Rubber Co.,
Ltd. (``GAR''), Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd., and Guizhou Tyre Import and
Export Co., Ltd. See Initiation Notice, 78 FR at 67108. These three
companies were collapsed into a collective entity, GTC, in the
investigation. See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires From the
People's Republic of China; Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 73 FR
9278, 9283 (February 20, 2008), unchanged in LTFV Investigation. GAR
does not export subject merchandise; as such, we have only listed
GTC in this section of the notice.
\15\ As noted above, the review was initiated on DCH, DC Rugao/
Jiangsu), and DC Donghai, and each company has been preliminarily
collapsed and treated as the DCH Single Entity for the purposes of
this review.
\16\ See 19 CFR 351.309(c).
\17\ See 19 CFR 351.309(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of
publication of this notice.\18\ Hearing requests should contain the
following information: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone
number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to
be discussed. Oral presentations will be limited to issues raised in
the case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made,
parties will be notified of the time and date for the hearing to be
held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
\19\ See 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unless otherwise extended, the Department intends to issue the
final results of this administrative review, which will include the
results of its analysis of issues raised in the case and rebuttal
briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results,
pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.
Assessment Rates
Upon issuance of the final results of this review, the Department
will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this review.\20\ The Department intends
to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after
publication of the final results of this review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For GTC, whose weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de
minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), we will calculate importer-
specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the
total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to
the total entered value of those same sales in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1).\21\ For duty assessment rates calculated on this basis,
we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate against the
entered customs values for the subject merchandise. If the weighted-
average dumping margin for the exporter is zero or de minimis, or if
the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, then the
Department will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries
without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ In these preliminary results, the Department applied the
assessment rate calculation method adopted in Antidumping
Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final
Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 24, 2011, the Department announced a refinement to its
assessment practice in NME cases. Pursuant to this refinement in
practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales
databases submitted by companies individually examined during this
review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at
the PRC-wide rate. In addition, if the Department determines that an
exporter under review had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any
suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number (i.e.,
at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65694-95 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the final
results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of
antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final
results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties,
where applicable.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements for estimated antidumping
duties, when imposed, will apply to all shipments of subject
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the publication of the final results of this administrative
review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) If the
companies preliminarily determined to be eligible for a separate rate
receive a separate rate in the final results of this administrative
review, their cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average
dumping margin established in the final results of this review, as
adjusted for domestic subsidies (except, if that rate is de minimis,
then the cash deposit rate will be zero); (2) for any previously
investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporter that is not under
review in this segment of the proceeding but that received a separate
rate in the most recently completed segment of this proceeding, the
cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate
published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding;
(3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been
found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be
equal to the cash deposit rate for the PRC-wide entity, which will be
equal to the rate assigned to the PRC-wide entity in the final results
of this administrative review; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash
deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that
supplied that non-PRC exporter. These cash deposit requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
[[Page 61295]]
review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in
the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
We are issuing and publishing notice of these results in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 30, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum
1. Background
2. Scope of the Order
3. Affiliation and Collapsing
4. Preliminary Determination of No Shipments
5. Non-Market Economy Country
6. Separate Rates
7. Margin for the Separate Rate Companies
8. PRC-Wide Entity
9. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Value Data
10. Surrogate Country
11. Economic Comparability
12. Significant Producers of Identical or Comparable Merchandise
13. Data Availability
14. Date of Sale
15. Comparisons to Normal Value
16. Export Price and Constructed Export Price
17. Value-Added Tax
18. Normal Value
19. Factor Valuations
20. Adjustment Under Section 777A(f) of the Act
21. Currency Conversion
[FR Doc. 2014-24275 Filed 10-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P