Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 45100-45104 [2018-19205]

Download as PDF 45100 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices 351.303(g).50 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification requirements. Notification to Interested Parties Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c). Dated: August 28, 2018. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Appendix Scope of the Investigation The scope of this investigation is certain on-the-road steel wheels, discs, and rims for tubeless tires with a nominal wheel diameter of 12 inches to 16.5 inches, regardless of width. Certain on-the-road steel wheels with a nominal wheel diameter of 12 inches to 16.5 inches within the scope are generally for road and highway trailers and other towable equipment, including, inter alia, utility trailers, cargo trailers, horse trailers, boat trailers, recreational trailers, and towable mobile homes. The standard widths of certain on-the-road steel wheels are 4 inches, 4.5 inches, 5 inches, 5.5 inches, 6 inches, and 6.5 inches, but all certain on-the-road steel wheels, regardless of width, are covered by the scope. The scope includes rims and discs for certain on-the-road steel wheels, whether imported as an assembly, unassembled, or separately. The scope includes certain onthe-road steel wheels regardless of steel composition, whether cladded or not cladded, whether finished or not finished, and whether coated or uncoated. The scope also includes certain on-the-road steel wheels with discs in either a ‘‘hub-piloted’’ or ‘‘studpiloted’’ mounting configuration, though the stud-piloted configuration is most common in the size range covered. All on-the-road wheels sold in the United States must meet Standard 110 or 120 of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, which requires a 50 See also Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 244001 rim marking, such as the ‘‘DOT’’ symbol, indicating compliance with applicable motor vehicle standards. See 49 CFR 571.110 and 571.120. The scope includes certain on-theroad steel wheels imported with or without NHTSA’s required markings. Certain on-the-road steel wheels imported as an assembly with a tire mounted on the wheel and/or with a valve stem or rims imported as an assembly with a tire mounted on the rim and/or with a valve stem are included in the scope of this investigation. However, if the steel wheels or rims are imported as an assembly with a tire mounted on the wheel or rim and/or with a valve stem attached, the tire and/or valve stem is not covered by the scope. Excluded from this scope are the following: (1) Steel wheels for use with tube-type tires; such tires use multi piece rims, which are two-piece and three-piece assemblies and require the use of an inner tube; (2) aluminum wheels; (3) certain on-the-road steel wheels that are coated entirely with chrome; and (4) steel wheels that do not meet Standard 110 or 120 of the NHTSA’s requirements other than the rim marking requirements found in 49 CFR 571.110S4.4.2 and 571.120S5.2. Certain on-the-road steel wheels subject to this investigation are properly classifiable under the following category of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS): 8716.90.5035 which covers the exact product covered by the scope whether entered as an assembled wheel or in components. Certain on-the-road steel wheels entered with a tire mounted on them may be entered under HTSUS 8716.90.5059 (Trailers and semi-trailers; other vehicles, not mechanically propelled, parts, wheels, other, wheels with other tires) (a category that will be broader than what is covered by the scope). While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2018–19206 Filed 9–4–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–091] Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Applicable August 28, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith Haynes at (202) 482–5139 or Emily Halle at (202) 482–0176, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petition On August 8, 2018, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received a countervailing duty (CVD) Petition concerning imports of certain steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in diameter (certain steel wheels) from the People’s Republic of China (China), filed in proper form on behalf of Dexstar Wheel, a division of Americana Development, Inc. (the petitioner), which is a domestic producer of certain steel wheels.1 The CVD Petition was accompanied by an antidumping duty (AD) Petition concerning imports of certain steel wheels from China. On August 10, 2018, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition in two separate supplemental questionnaires, one dealing with general issues with the Petition and the other with issues related to Volume III of the Petition (i.e., the CVD allegation).2 The petitioner filed its responses to the supplemental questionnaires on August 15, 2018.3 On August 17, 2018, we spoke with the petitioner regarding the scope language submitted in its August 15, 2018, submission.4 On August 20, 2018, the petitioner filed an amendment to the scope, further clarifying the scope language.5 1 See the petitioner’s letter, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated August 8, 2018 (the Petition). 2 See Commerce’s letters, ‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questions’’ (CVD Deficiency Questionnaire), and ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questions’’ (General Issues Deficiency Questionnaire), each dated August 10, 2018. 3 See the petitioner’s letters, ‘‘Certain Steel Wheels 12 To 16.5 inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China (C–570–091): Petitioners’ Response to Commerce’s August 10, 2018 Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition’’ (CVD Supplement) and ‘‘Petitioners’ Response to Commerce’s August 10, 2018 General Issues Questionnaire Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels from the People’s Republic of China,’’ (General Issues Supplement), each dated August 15, 2018. 4 See memorandum, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,’’ dated August 17, 2018. 5 See the petitioner’s letter, ‘‘Petitioner’s Response to the Department of Commerce’s August 17, 2018 Additional Questions Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated August 20, 2018 (Second Scope and AD Supplement). E:\FR\FM\05SEN1.SGM 05SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of China (GOC) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of certain steel wheels in China and that imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing certain steel wheels in the United States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating a CVD investigation, the Petition is accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations. Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support necessary for the initiation of the requested CVD investigation.6 Period of Investigation Because the Petition was filed on August 8, 2018, the period of investigation is January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017. Scope of the Investigation The product covered by this investigation is certain steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in diameter from China. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, see the Appendix to this notice. daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Scope Comments During our review of the Petition, Commerce contacted the petitioner regarding the proposed scope language to ensure that the scope language in the Petition is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.7 As a result of the petitioner’s submissions, the scope of the Petition was modified to clarify the description of merchandise covered by the Petition. The description of the merchandise covered by this initiation, as described in the Appendix to this notice, reflects these clarifications. As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce’s regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage 6 See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the Petition’’ section, infra. 7 See General Issues Supplement, at 2–5 and Exhibit SGQ–2 (Revised Scope); see also August 20 Petition Supplement, at 1–2 and Exhibit SQR2–1 (Revised Scope). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 244001 (scope).8 Commerce will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual information,9 all such factual information should be limited to public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that all interested parties submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on September 17, 2018, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on September 27, 2018, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comments deadline.10 Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during this 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 Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. Filing Requirements All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).11 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, and stamped 8 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble). 9 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual information’’). 10 See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 11 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011). See also Enforcement and Compliance: Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce’s electronic filing requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/ Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20 Procedures.pdf. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 45101 with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines. Consultations Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce notified representatives of the GOC of the receipt of the Petition and provided them the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD Petition.12 The GOC did not request consultations. Determination of Industry Support for the Petition Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(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, Commerce 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 Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The 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 Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,13 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce’s determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such 12 See Commerce letter, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated August 9, 2018. 13 See section 771(10) of the Act. E:\FR\FM\05SEN1.SGM 05SEN1 45102 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.14 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, the petitioner does not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigation.15 Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that certain steel wheels, as defined in the scope, constitute a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.16 In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2017.17 In addition, the petitioner provided a letter of support from American Wheel Corporation, stating that the company supports the Petition and providing its own production of the domestic like product in 2017.18 The petitioner identifies itself and American Wheel Corporation as the only companies constituting the U.S. certain steel wheels industry and states that there are no other known producers of 14 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)). 15 See Volume I of the Petition, at I–6 through I– 8. 16 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China’’ (China CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II (Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China). This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. 17 See Volume I of the Petition at I–9, I–31 and Exhibit I–11. 18 Id. at I–9 and Exhibit I–2. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 244001 certain steel wheels in the United States; therefore, the Petition is supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.19 Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petition.20 First, the Petition established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).21 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.22 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for 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.23 Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act. Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that it is requesting that Commerce initiate.24 Injury Test Because China is a ‘‘Subsidies Agreement Country’’ within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from China materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry. 19 Id. at I–2, I–9 and Exhibit I–1; see also General Issues Supplement, at SGQ–5 and Exhibit SGQ–5. 20 Id. 21 Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act. 22 See China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 23 Id. 24 Id. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.25 The petitioner contends that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; reduced market share; underselling and price depression or suppression; lost sales and lost revenues; decline in production, U.S. shipments, and capacity utilization; decline in production-related workers and hours worked; decline in capital expenditures; and negative impact on financial performance.26 We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.27 Initiation of CVD Investigation Based on the examination of the Petition, we find that the Petition meets the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether imports of certain steel wheels from China benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOC. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation. Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all of the subsidy programs alleged in the Petition, with certain limitations. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see China CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS. 25 See Volume I of the Petition, at I–19 through I–21 and Exhibit I–8. 26 Id. at I–15 through I–42 and Exhibits I–2, I–6, I–8, I–10, I–11, I–14 through I–16; see also General Issues Supplement, at SGQ–5, SGQ–6 and Exhibit SGQ–6. 27 See China CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III (Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China). E:\FR\FM\05SEN1.SGM 05SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices Respondent Selection The petitioner named 36 producers/ exporters as accounting for the majority of exports of certain steel wheels to the United States from China.28 In the event Commerce determines that the number of companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company based upon Commerce’s resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of certain steel wheels from China during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers listed in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in the Appendix. On August 21, 2018, we released CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and respondent selection must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of this CVD investigation.29 Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the Commerce’s website at https://enforcement.trade.gov/ apo. Comments regarding respondent selection must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully, in its entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the date established by Commerce. We intend to finalize our decisions regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Distribution of Copies of the Petition In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petition have been provided to the GOC via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). 28 See General Issues Supplemental at Exhibit SGQ–1. 29 See memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of China: U.S. Customs and Border Protection Entry Data,’’ dated August 21, 2018. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 244001 ITC Notification We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determination by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of certain steel wheels from China are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.30 A negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being terminated.31 Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. Submission of Factual Information Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (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 Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)–(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 32 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.33 Time limits for the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in this investigation. Extensions of Time Limits Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered 30 See section 703(a)(2) of the Act. section 703(a)(1) of the Act. 32 See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 33 See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 31 See PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 45103 untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/201322853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in this investigation. Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.34 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g).35 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification requirements. Notification to Interested Parties Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c). 34 See section 782(b) of the Act. Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (‘‘Final Rule’’); see also frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 35 See E:\FR\FM\05SEN1.SGM 05SEN1 45104 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices Dated: August 28, 2018. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Appendix I Scope of the Investigation The scope of this investigation is certain on-the-road steel wheels, discs, and rims for tubeless tires with a nominal wheel diameter of 12 inches to 16.5 inches, regardless of width. Certain on-the-road steel wheels with a nominal wheel diameter of 12 inches to 16.5 inches within the scope are generally for road and highway trailers and other towable equipment, including, inter alia, utility trailers, cargo trailers, horse trailers, boat trailers, recreational trailers, and towable mobile homes. The standard widths of certain on-the-road steel wheels are 4 inches, 4.5 inches, 5 inches, 5.5 inches, 6 inches, and 6.5 inches, but all certain on-the-road steel wheels, regardless of width, are covered by the scope. The scope includes rims and discs for certain on-the-road steel wheels, whether imported as an assembly, unassembled, or separately. The scope includes certain onthe-road steel wheels regardless of steel composition, whether cladded or not cladded, whether finished or not finished, and whether coated or uncoated. The scope also includes certain on-the-road steel wheels with discs in either a ‘‘hub-piloted’’ or ‘‘studpiloted’’ mounting configuration, though the stud-piloted configuration is most common in the size range covered. All on-the-road wheels sold in the United States must meet Standard 110 or 120 of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, which requires a rim marking, such as the ‘‘DOT’’ symbol, indicating compliance with applicable motor vehicle standards. See 49 CFR 571.110 and 571.120. The scope includes certain on-theroad steel wheels imported with or without NHTSA’s required markings. Certain on-the-road steel wheels imported as an assembly with a tire mounted on the wheel and/or with a valve stem or rims imported as an assembly with a tire mounted on the rim and/or with a valve stem are included in the scope of this investigation. However, if the steel wheels or rims are imported as an assembly with a tire mounted on the wheel or rim and/or with a valve stem attached, the tire and/or valve stem is not covered by the scope. Excluded from this scope are the following: (1) Steel wheels for use with tube-type tires; such tires use multi piece rims, which are two-piece and three-piece assemblies and require the use of an inner tube; (2) aluminum wheels; (3) certain on-the-road steel wheels that are coated entirely with chrome; and (4) steel wheels that do not meet Standard 110 or 120 of the NHTSA’s requirements other than the rim marking requirements found in 49 CFR 571.110S4.4.2 and 571.120S5.2. Certain on-the-road steel wheels subject to this investigation are properly classifiable under the following category of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Sep 04, 2018 Jkt 244001 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS): 8716.90.5035 which covers the exact product covered by the scope whether entered as an assembled wheel or in components. Certain on-the-road steel wheels entered with a tire mounted on them may be entered under HTSUS 8716.90.5059 (Trailers and semi-trailers; other vehicles, not mechanically propelled, parts, wheels, other, wheels with other tires) (a category that will be broader than what is covered by the scope). While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive. Justification for Duty-Free Entry: There are no instruments of the same general category manufactured in the United States. Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs: October 5, 2017. Dated: August 28, 2018. Gregory W. Campbell, Director, Subsidies Enforcement, Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2018–19208 Filed 9–4–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P [FR Doc. 2018–19205 Filed 9–4–18; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Patent and Trademark Office DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Patent Review and Derivation Proceedings Proposed collection; comment Application(s) for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instruments ACTION: Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106– 36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301), we invite comments on the question of whether instruments of equivalent scientific value, for the purposes for which the instruments shown below are intended to be used, are being manufactured in the United States. Comments must comply with 15 CFR 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the regulations and be postmarked on or before September 25, 2018. Address written comments to Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230. Applications may be examined between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. at the U.S. Department of Commerce in Room 3720. Docket Number: 17–019. Applicant: University of California, Berkeley, 100 Hearst Memorial Mining Building, Berkeley, CA 94720. Instrument: High Field Cryogen-Free Measurement System (CFMS) for Precision Measurement of Physical Properties. Manufacturer: Cryogenic US, LLC, United Kingdom. Intended Use: The instrument will be used to study thin films of metal-oxides for advanced oxide-based electronic devices, magnetic and electrical properties of oxide materials and devices at low temperatures and/or high magnetic fields. Angle dependent magnetoelectric properties of the devices will be explored on multiple axes. The investigations done with this instrument will lead to advancement of understanding of the properties of metal-oxide thin films and their interfaces for new generation of oxidebased microelectronic devices. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 request. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 invites comments on a proposed extension of an existing information collection: 0651–0069 (Patent Review and Derivation Proceedings). DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before November 5, 2018. You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • Email: InformationCollection@ uspto.gov. Include ‘‘0651–0069 comment’’ in the subject line of the message. • Federal Rulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. • Mail: Michael P. Tierney, Records and Information Governance Division Director, Office of the Chief Technology Officer, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information should be directed to Michael P. Tierney, Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450; by telephone at 571–272–4676; or by email to Michael.Tierney@uspto.gov with ‘‘0651–0069 comment’’ in the subject line. Additional information about this collection is also available at https:// www.reginfo.gov under ‘‘Information Collection Review.’’ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: I. Abstract The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, which was enacted into law on E:\FR\FM\05SEN1.SGM 05SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 5, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45100-45104]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19205]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-091]


Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter From the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 
Investigation

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Applicable August 28, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith Haynes at (202) 482-5139 or 
Emily Halle at (202) 482-0176, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On August 8, 2018, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received a countervailing duty (CVD) Petition concerning imports of 
certain steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in diameter (certain steel 
wheels) from the People's Republic of China (China), filed in proper 
form on behalf of Dexstar Wheel, a division of Americana Development, 
Inc. (the petitioner), which is a domestic producer of certain steel 
wheels.\1\ The CVD Petition was accompanied by an antidumping duty (AD) 
Petition concerning imports of certain steel wheels from China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the petitioner's letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition 
of Antidumping Duties and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in Diameter from the People's 
Republic of China,'' dated August 8, 2018 (the Petition).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 10, 2018, Commerce requested supplemental information 
pertaining to certain aspects of the Petition in two separate 
supplemental questionnaires, one dealing with general issues with the 
Petition and the other with issues related to Volume III of the 
Petition (i.e., the CVD allegation).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Commerce's letters, ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 
Inches in Diameter from the People's Republic of China: Supplemental 
Questions'' (CVD Deficiency Questionnaire), and ``Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People's 
Republic of China: Supplemental Questions'' (General Issues 
Deficiency Questionnaire), each dated August 10, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner filed its responses to the supplemental 
questionnaires on August 15, 2018.\3\ On August 17, 2018, we spoke with 
the petitioner regarding the scope language submitted in its August 15, 
2018, submission.\4\ On August 20, 2018, the petitioner filed an 
amendment to the scope, further clarifying the scope language.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See the petitioner's letters, ``Certain Steel Wheels 12 To 
16.5 inches in Diameter from the People's Republic of China (C-570-
091): Petitioners' Response to Commerce's August 10, 2018 
Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding the Countervailing Duty 
Petition'' (CVD Supplement) and ``Petitioners' Response to 
Commerce's August 10, 2018 General Issues Questionnaire Regarding 
the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic 
of China,'' (General Issues Supplement), each dated August 15, 2018.
    \4\ See memorandum, ``Phone Call with Counsel to the 
Petitioner,'' dated August 17, 2018.
    \5\ See the petitioner's letter, ``Petitioner's Response to the 
Department of Commerce's August 17, 2018 Additional Questions 
Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 
Inches in Diameter from the People's Republic of China,'' dated 
August 20, 2018 (Second Scope and AD Supplement).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45101]]

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Government of China 
(GOC) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of certain steel 
wheels in China and that imports of such products are materially 
injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry 
producing certain steel wheels in the United States. Consistent with 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged 
programs on which we are initiating a CVD investigation, the Petition 
is accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner 
supporting its allegations.
    Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the 
petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support necessary for the 
initiation of the requested CVD investigation.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' 
section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on August 8, 2018, the period of 
investigation is January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017.

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is certain steel wheels 
12 to 16.5 inches in diameter from China. For a full description of the 
scope of this investigation, see the Appendix to this notice.

Scope Comments

    During our review of the Petition, Commerce contacted the 
petitioner regarding the proposed scope language to ensure that the 
scope language in the Petition is an accurate reflection of the 
products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.\7\ As a 
result of the petitioner's submissions, the scope of the Petition was 
modified to clarify the description of merchandise covered by the 
Petition. The description of the merchandise covered by this 
initiation, as described in the Appendix to this notice, reflects these 
clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Supplement, at 2-5 and Exhibit SGQ-2 
(Revised Scope); see also August 20 Petition Supplement, at 1-2 and 
Exhibit SQR2-1 (Revised Scope).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding 
product coverage (scope).\8\ Commerce will consider all comments 
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary 
determination. If scope comments include factual information,\9\ all 
such factual information should be limited to public information. To 
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that 
all interested parties submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time 
(ET) on September 17, 2018, which is 20 calendar days from the 
signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include 
factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on September 27, 
2018, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comments deadline.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider 
relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during this 
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 Commerce and request permission to 
submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed 
on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the electronic 
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) 
with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable 
deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011). See also Enforcement and 
Compliance: Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 
(November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing 
requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information 
on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx, and a handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce 
notified representatives of the GOC of the receipt of the Petition and 
provided them the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD 
Petition.\12\ The GOC did not request consultations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Commerce letter, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on 
Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in Diameter from the People's 
Republic of China,'' dated August 9, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(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, Commerce 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 Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The 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 Commerce and the 
ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\13\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination 
is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may 
result in different definitions of the like product, such

[[Page 45102]]

differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to 
law.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \14\ 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, the petitioner does not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the investigation.\15\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that certain steel wheels, 
as defined in the scope, constitute a single domestic like product, and 
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-6 through I-8.
    \16\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see 
memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from 
the People's Republic of China'' (China CVD Initiation Checklist), 
at Attachment II (Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Steel Wheels 12 
to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People's Republic of China). 
This checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file 
electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is 
also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main 
Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in the Appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its 
own production of the domestic like product in 2017.\17\ In addition, 
the petitioner provided a letter of support from American Wheel 
Corporation, stating that the company supports the Petition and 
providing its own production of the domestic like product in 2017.\18\ 
The petitioner identifies itself and American Wheel Corporation as the 
only companies constituting the U.S. certain steel wheels industry and 
states that there are no other known producers of certain steel wheels 
in the United States; therefore, the Petition is supported by 100 
percent of the U.S. industry.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Volume I of the Petition at I-9, I-31 and Exhibit I-11.
    \18\ Id. at I-9 and Exhibit I-2.
    \19\ Id. at I-2, I-9 and Exhibit I-1; see also General Issues 
Supplement, at SGQ-5 and Exhibit SGQ-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, the General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce 
indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the 
Petition.\20\ First, the Petition established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not 
required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support 
(e.g., polling).\21\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have 
met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\22\ Finally, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic 
producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for 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.\23\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
    \21\ Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \22\ See China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in 
section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the CVD investigation that it is 
requesting that Commerce initiate.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because China is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from China materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioner 
alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold 
provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-19 through I-21 and 
Exhibit I-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; 
reduced market share; underselling and price depression or suppression; 
lost sales and lost revenues; decline in production, U.S. shipments, 
and capacity utilization; decline in production-related workers and 
hours worked; decline in capital expenditures; and negative impact on 
financial performance.\26\ We have assessed the allegations and 
supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material 
injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations 
are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id. at I-15 through I-42 and Exhibits I-2, I-6, I-8, I-10, 
I-11, I-14 through I-16; see also General Issues Supplement, at SGQ-
5, SGQ-6 and Exhibit SGQ-6.
    \27\ See China CVD Initiation Checklist at Attachment III 
(Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the 
People's Republic of China).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigation

    Based on the examination of the Petition, we find that the Petition 
meets the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are 
initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether imports of certain 
steel wheels from China benefit from countervailable subsidies 
conferred by the GOC. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our 
preliminary determination no later than 65 days after the date of this 
initiation.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all of the 
subsidy programs alleged in the Petition, with certain limitations. For 
a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each 
program, see China CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the 
initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS.

[[Page 45103]]

Respondent Selection

    The petitioner named 36 producers/exporters as accounting for the 
majority of exports of certain steel wheels to the United States from 
China.\28\ In the event Commerce determines that the number of 
companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company 
based upon Commerce's resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to 
select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of certain steel wheels from 
China during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States numbers listed in the ``Scope of the 
Investigation,'' in the Appendix. On August 21, 2018, we released CBP 
data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with 
access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested 
parties wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and respondent 
selection must do so within three business days of the publication date 
of the notice of initiation of this CVD investigation.\29\ Commerce 
will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent 
selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See General Issues Supplemental at Exhibit SGQ-1.
    \29\ See memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation of 
Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the People's 
Republic of China: U.S. Customs and Border Protection Entry Data,'' 
dated August 21, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on the Commerce's website at https://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
    Comments regarding respondent selection must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be 
received successfully, in its entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 
p.m. ET on the date established by Commerce. We intend to finalize our 
decisions regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication 
of this notice.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petition have been 
provided to the GOC via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will 
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to each 
exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
702(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of certain steel wheels from China are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\30\ A negative ITC determination will result in the 
investigation being terminated.\31\ Otherwise, this investigation will 
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \31\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (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 Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual 
information described in (i)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires any 
party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which 
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 
\32\ 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.\33\ Time limits for 
the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, 
which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual 
information being submitted. Interested parties should review the 
regulations prior to submitting factual information in this 
investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \33\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request 
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the 
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are 
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time 
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting 
forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension 
requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request 
must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited 
circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension 
of time limits. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final 
Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 
submitting factual information in this investigation.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\34\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\35\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \35\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule''); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
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 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce 
published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents 
Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). 
Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should ensure that 
they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of 
letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 
777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).


[[Page 45104]]


    Dated: August 28, 2018.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of this investigation is certain on-the-road steel 
wheels, discs, and rims for tubeless tires with a nominal wheel 
diameter of 12 inches to 16.5 inches, regardless of width. Certain 
on-the-road steel wheels with a nominal wheel diameter of 12 inches 
to 16.5 inches within the scope are generally for road and highway 
trailers and other towable equipment, including, inter alia, utility 
trailers, cargo trailers, horse trailers, boat trailers, 
recreational trailers, and towable mobile homes. The standard widths 
of certain on-the-road steel wheels are 4 inches, 4.5 inches, 5 
inches, 5.5 inches, 6 inches, and 6.5 inches, but all certain on-
the-road steel wheels, regardless of width, are covered by the 
scope.
    The scope includes rims and discs for certain on-the-road steel 
wheels, whether imported as an assembly, unassembled, or separately. 
The scope includes certain on-the-road steel wheels regardless of 
steel composition, whether cladded or not cladded, whether finished 
or not finished, and whether coated or uncoated. The scope also 
includes certain on-the-road steel wheels with discs in either a 
``hub-piloted'' or ``stud-piloted'' mounting configuration, though 
the stud-piloted configuration is most common in the size range 
covered.
    All on-the-road wheels sold in the United States must meet 
Standard 110 or 120 of the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration's (NHTSA) Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 
which requires a rim marking, such as the ``DOT'' symbol, indicating 
compliance with applicable motor vehicle standards. See 49 CFR 
571.110 and 571.120. The scope includes certain on-the-road steel 
wheels imported with or without NHTSA's required markings.
    Certain on-the-road steel wheels imported as an assembly with a 
tire mounted on the wheel and/or with a valve stem or rims imported 
as an assembly with a tire mounted on the rim and/or with a valve 
stem are included in the scope of this investigation. However, if 
the steel wheels or rims are imported as an assembly with a tire 
mounted on the wheel or rim and/or with a valve stem attached, the 
tire and/or valve stem is not covered by the scope.
    Excluded from this scope are the following:
    (1) Steel wheels for use with tube-type tires; such tires use 
multi piece rims, which are two-piece and three-piece assemblies and 
require the use of an inner tube;
    (2) aluminum wheels;
    (3) certain on-the-road steel wheels that are coated entirely 
with chrome; and
    (4) steel wheels that do not meet Standard 110 or 120 of the 
NHTSA's requirements other than the rim marking requirements found 
in 49 CFR 571.110S4.4.2 and 571.120S5.2.
    Certain on-the-road steel wheels subject to this investigation 
are properly classifiable under the following category of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS): 
8716.90.5035 which covers the exact product covered by the scope 
whether entered as an assembled wheel or in components. Certain on-
the-road steel wheels entered with a tire mounted on them may be 
entered under HTSUS 8716.90.5059 (Trailers and semi-trailers; other 
vehicles, not mechanically propelled, parts, wheels, other, wheels 
with other tires) (a category that will be broader than what is 
covered by the scope). While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
subject merchandise is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2018-19205 Filed 9-4-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.