Utility Scale Wind Towers From Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 37992-37998 [2019-16655]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
37992
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2019 / Notices
Dated: July 29, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
under the International Union of Pure and
Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) name propan-2one. In addition to the IUPAC name, acetone
is also referred to as +-ketopropane (or betaketopropane), ketone propane, methyl
ketone, dimethyl ketone, DMK, dimethyl
carbonyl, propanone, 2-propanone, dimethyl
formaldehyde, pyroacetic acid, pyroacetic
ether, and pyroacetic spirit. Acetone is an
isomer of the chemical formula C3H6O, with
a specific molecular formula of CH3COCH3 or
(CH3)2CO.
The scope covers both pure acetone (with
or without impurities) and acetone that is
combined or mixed with other products,
including, but not limited to, isopropyl
alcohol, benzene, diethyl ether, methanol,
chloroform, and ethanol. Acetone that has
been combined with other products is
included within the scope, regardless of
whether the combining occurs in third
countries.
The scope also includes acetone that is
commingled with acetone from sources not
subject to this investigation.
For combined and commingled products,
only the acetone component is covered by
the scope of this investigation. However,
when acetone is combined with acetone
components from sources not subject to this
investigation, those third country acetone
components may still be subject to other
acetone investigations.
Notwithstanding the foregoing language, an
acetone combination or mixture that is
transformed through a chemical reaction into
another product, such that, for example, the
acetone can no longer be separated from the
other products through a distillation process
(e.g., methyl methacrylate (MMA) or
Bisphenol A (BPA)), is excluded from this
investigation.
A combination or mixture is excluded from
these investigations if the total acetone
component (regardless of the source or
sources) comprises less than 5 percent of the
combination or mixture, on a dry weight
basis.
The Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS)
registry number for acetone is 67–64–1.
The merchandise covered by this
investigation is currently classifiable under
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS) subheadings 2914.11.1000
and 2914.11.5000. Combinations or mixtures
of acetone may enter under subheadings in
Chapter 38 of the HTSUS, including, but not
limited to, those under heading
3814.00.1000, 3814.00.2000, 3814.00.5010,
and 3814.00.5090. The list of items found
under these HTSUS subheadings is nonexhaustive. Although these HTSUS
subheadings and CAS registry number are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
scope of this investigation is dispositive.
Appendix I
Appendix II
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation is all grades of liquid or
aqueous acetone. Acetone is also known
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c),
interested parties who wish to request a
hearing, limited to issues raised in the
case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a
written request to the Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, U.S. Department of
Commerce, within 30 days after the date
of publication of this notice. Requests
should contain the party’s name,
address, and telephone number, the
number of participants, whether any
participant is a foreign national, and a
list of the issues to be discussed. If a
request for a hearing is made, Commerce
intends to hold the hearing at the U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230, at a time and date to be
determined. Parties should confirm by
telephone the date, time, and location of
the hearing two days before the
scheduled date.
Final Determination
Section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.210(b)(1) provide that
Commerce will issue the final
determination within 75 days after the
date of its preliminary determination.
Accordingly, Commerce will make its
final determination no later than 75
days after the signature date of this
preliminary determination.
International Trade Commission
Notification
In accordance with section 733(f) of
the Act, Commerce will notify the
International Trade Commission (ITC) of
its preliminary determination. If the
final determination is affirmative, the
ITC will determine before the later of
120 days after the date of this
preliminary determination or 45 days
after the final determination whether
these imports are materially injuring, or
threaten material injury to, the U.S.
industry.
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Notification to Interested Parties
This determination is issued and
published in accordance with sections
733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.205(c).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Aug 02, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
III. Period of Investigation
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Scope Comments
VI. Preliminary Determination of No
Shipments
VII. Application of Facts Available and Use
of Adverse Inference
VIII. All-Others Rate
IX. Verification
X. Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2019–16660 Filed 8–2–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–122–867, A–560–833, A–580–902, A–552–
825]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of
Korea, and the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-FairValue Investigations
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable July 29, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael J. Heaney at (202) 482–4475
(Canada); Brittany Bauer (202) 482–3860
(Indonesia); Rebecca Janz at (202) 482–
2972 (Republic of Korea (Korea)); and
Edythe Artman at (202) 482–3931
(Socialist Republic of Vietnam
(Vietnam)); AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
The Petitions
On July 9, 2019, the U.S. Department
of Commerce (Commerce) received
antidumping duty (AD) petitions
concerning imports of utility scale wind
towers (wind towers) from Canada,
Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam, filed in
proper form on behalf of the Wind
Tower Trade Coalition (the petitioner).1
The Petitions were accompanied by
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions
concerning imports of wind towers from
Canada, Indonesia, and Vietnam.
1 See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties on Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada,
Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam,’’ dated July 9, 2019 (the
Petitions).
E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM
05AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2019 / Notices
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
During the period July 12 through 22,
2019, Commerce requested
supplemental information pertaining to
certain aspects of the Petitions in
separate supplemental questionnaires.2
The petitioner filed responses to the
supplemental questionnaires between
July 16 and 24, 2019.3
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioner alleges that imports
of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia,
Korea, and Vietnam are being, or are
likely to be, sold in the United States at
less than fair value (LTFV) within the
meaning of section 731 of the Act, and
that imports of such products are
materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, the domestic wind
2 See Commerce’s Letters, ‘‘Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam and Countervailing Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia,
and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Supplemental Questions,’’ dated July 12, 2019; and,
‘‘Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties
on Imports of Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada: Supplemental Questions,’’ ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia:
Supplemental Questions,’’ ‘‘Petition for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of
Korea: Supplemental Questions,’’ and ‘‘Petition for
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports
of Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Supplemental Questions,’’ all
dated July 15, 2019; see also Memoranda, ‘‘Phone
Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,’’ dated July 15,
2019; ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,’’
dated July 18, 2019; and, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel
to the Petitioner,’’ dated July 22, 2019.
3 See Petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Utility Scale Wind
Towers from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of
Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Responses to First Supplemental Questions on
Common Issues and Injury Volume I of the
Petition,’’ dated July 16, 2019 (General Issues
Supplement); ‘‘Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada: Responses to First Supplemental Questions
on Canada Volume II of the Petition,’’ ‘‘Utility Scale
Wind Towers from Indonesia: Responses to First
Supplemental Questions on Indonesia Volume III of
the Petition,’’ and Utility Scale Wind Towers from
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Responses to
First Supplemental Questions on Vietnam Volume
V of the Petition,’’ each dated July 18, 2019; ‘‘Utility
Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea:
Responses to First Supplemental Questions on
Korea Volume IV of the Petition,’’ dated July 19,
2019; ‘‘Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada,
Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Responses to Second
Supplemental Questions on Common Issues and
Injury Volume I of the Petition,’’ dated July 19, 2019
(Scope Supplement); ‘‘Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Canada: Responses to Second Supplemental
Questions on Canada Volume II of the Petition,’’
‘‘Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia:
Responses to Second Supplemental Questions on
Indonesia Volume III of the Petition,’’ ‘‘Utility Scale
Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea:
Responses to Second Supplemental Questions on
Volume IV of the Petition,’’ and ‘‘Utility Scale Wind
Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Responses to Second Supplemental Questions on
Vietnam Volume V of the Petition,’’ each dated July
24, 2019.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Aug 02, 2019
Jkt 247001
tower industry in the United States.
Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the
Act, the Petitions are accompanied by
information reasonably available to the
petitioner supporting its allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioner
filed the Petitions on behalf of the
domestic industry, because the
petitioner is an interested party, as
defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act.
Commerce also finds that the petitioner
demonstrated sufficient industry
support necessary for the initiation of
the requested AD investigations.4
Periods of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on
July 9, 2019, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.204(b)(1), the period of
investigation (POI) for the Canada,
Indonesia, and Korea investigations is
July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019.
Because Vietnam is a non-market
economy (NME) country, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI for the
Vietnam investigation is January 1, 2019
through June 30, 2019.
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these
investigations is wind towers from
Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam.
For a full description of the scope of
these investigations, see the Appendix
to this notice.
Scope Comments
During our review of the Petitions, we
contacted the petitioner regarding the
proposed scope to ensure that the scope
language in the Petitions is an accurate
reflection of the products for which the
domestic industry is seeking relief.5 As
a result, the scope of the Petitions was
modified to clarify the description of the
merchandise covered by the Petitions.
The description of the merchandise
covered by these investigations, 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
(i.e., scope).6 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
4 See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions’’ section, infra.
5 See General Issues Supplement; see also
Memorandum, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to the
Petitioner,’’ dated July 18, 2019; and Scope
Supplement.
6 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties;
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)
(Preamble).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37993
include factual information,7 all such
factual information should be limited to
public information. To facilitate
preparation of its questionnaires,
Commerce requests that all interested
parties submit scope comments by 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on August 19,
2019, which is 20 calendar days from
the signature date of this notice.8 Any
rebuttal comments, which may include
factual information, must be filed by
5:00 p.m. ET on August 29, 2019, which
is 10 calendar days from the initial
comment deadline.9
Commerce requests that any factual
information the parties consider
relevant to the scope of the
investigations be submitted during this
time period. However, if a party
subsequently finds that additional
factual information pertaining to the
scope of the investigations may be
relevant, the party may contact
Commerce and request permission to
submit the additional information. All
such comments must also be filed on
the records of the concurrent AD and
CVD investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be
filed electronically via Enforcement and
Compliance’s Antidumping Duty and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).10
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.
Comments on Product Characteristics
Commerce is providing interested
parties an opportunity to comment on
the appropriate physical characteristics
7 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual
information’’).
8 Because the deadline falls on a Sunday (i.e.,
August 18, 2019), the deadline becomes the next
business day (i.e., August 19, 2019).
9 See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
10 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,
effective 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.
E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM
05AUN1
37994
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2019 / Notices
of wind towers to be reported in
response to Commerce’s AD
questionnaires. This information will be
used to identify the key physical
characteristics of the subject
merchandise in order to develop
appropriate product-comparison
criteria, as well as to report the relevant
factors of production (FOPs) accurately.
Interested parties may provide any
information or comments that they feel
are relevant to the development of an
accurate list of physical characteristics.
Specifically, they may provide
comments as to which characteristics
are appropriate to use as: (1) General
product characteristics, and (2) product
comparison criteria. We note that it is
not always appropriate to use all
product characteristics as product
comparison criteria. We base product
comparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products.
In other words, although there may be
some physical product characteristics
utilized by manufacturers to describe
wind towers, it may be that only a select
few product characteristics take into
account commercially meaningful
physical characteristics. In addition,
interested parties may comment on the
order in which the physical
characteristics should be used in
matching products. Generally,
Commerce attempts to list the most
important physical characteristics first
and the least important characteristics
last.
In order to consider the suggestions of
interested parties in developing and
issuing the AD questionnaires, all
product characteristics comments must
be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 19,
2019, which is 20 calendar days from
the signature date of this notice.11 Any
rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00
p.m. ET on August 29, 2019. All
comments and submissions to
Commerce must be filed electronically
using ACCESS, as explained above, on
the record of each of the AD
investigations.
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act provides that a petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) At least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
11 See 19 CFR 351.303(b). Because the deadline
falls on a Sunday (i.e., August 18, 2019), the
deadline becomes the next business day (i.e.,
August 19, 2019).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Aug 02, 2019
Jkt 247001
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D)
of the Act provides that, if the petition
does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product,
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 Act
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,12 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
differences do not render the decision of
either agency contrary to law.13
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
Petitions.14 Based on our analysis of the
information submitted on the record, we
12 See
section 771(10) of the Act.
e.g., 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)).
14 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17–18 and
Exhibits I–9 and I–14; see also General Issues
Supplement, at 1–2 and Exhibit I–Supp–2; and
Scope Supplement, at 1 and Exhibit I–Supp2–1.
13 See,
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
have determined that wind towers, as
defined in the scope, constitute a single
domestic like product, and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of
that domestic like product.15
On July 26, 2019, we received
industry support challenges from
Marmen Energy Co. (Marmen) and
Vestas Towers America, Inc. (Vestas),
U.S. producers of wind towers.16 On
July 29, 2019, the petitioner responded
to the standing challenges from Marmen
and Vestas.17 Based on information
provided in the Petitions and in the
letters from Marmen and Vestas, the
share of total U.S. production of the
domestic like product in calendar year
2018 represented by the supporters of
the Petitions did not account for more
than 50 percent of the total production
of the domestic like product. Therefore,
in accordance with section 732(c)(4)(D)
of the Act, we relied on other
information to determine industry
support.18 In determining whether the
petitioner has standing under sections
732(c)(4)(A) and 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act,
we considered the industry support data
contained in the Petitions and other
information on the record with
15 For a discussion of the domestic like product
analysis as applied to these cases and information
regarding industry support, see Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale
Wind Towers from Canada (Canada AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry
Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Petitions Covering Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Attachment II);
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Indonesia (Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers
from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale
Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam (Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II. These checklists are dated
concurrently with this notice and are on file
electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents
filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central
Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Commerce
building.
16 See Marmen’s Letter, ‘‘Utility Scale Wind
Towers from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of
Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Standing Challenge,’’ dated July 26, 2019 (Marmen
Letter); see also Vestas’ Letter, ‘‘Utility Scale Wind
Towers from Canada, Indonesia, South Korea, and
Vietnam: Vestas Towers America, Inc.’s Comments
on Industry Support,’’ dated July 26, 2019 (Vestas
Letter).
17 See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Utility Scale Wind
Towers from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of
Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Response to Standing Challenge and Comments on
Industry Support,’’ dated July 29, 2019 (Petitioner
Letter).
18 For further discussion, see Canada AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see also
Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II;
Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and
Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM
05AUN1
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2019 / Notices
reference to the domestic like product as
defined in the ‘‘Scope of the
Investigations,’’ in the Appendix to this
notice. To establish industry support,
the petitioner provided its own 2018
production of the domestic like product,
as well as the 2018 production by the
supporters of the Petitions. Other
information on the record establishes
the total 2018 production of other U.S.
producers of the domestic like product.
Section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act states
that (i) Commerce ‘‘shall disregard the
position of domestic producers who
oppose the petition if such producers
are related to foreign producers, as
defined in section 771(4)(B)(ii), unless
such domestic producers demonstrate
that their interests as domestic
producers would be adversely affected
by the imposition of an antidumping
duty order;’’ and (ii) Commerce ‘‘may
disregard the position of domestic
producers of a domestic like product
who are importers of the subject
merchandise.’’ In addition, 19 CFR
351.203(e)(4) states that the position of
a domestic producer that opposes the
petition (i) will be disregarded if such
producer is related to a foreign producer
or to a foreign exporter under section
771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act, unless such
domestic producer demonstrates to the
Secretary’s satisfaction that its interests
as a domestic producer would be
adversely affected by the imposition of
an antidumping order; and (ii) may be
disregarded if the producer is an
importer of the subject merchandise or
is related to such an importer under
section 771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act. Certain
producers of the domestic like product
that opposed the Petitions are related to
foreign producers and/or imported
subject merchandise from the subject
countries. We have analyzed the
information provided by the petitioner
and information provided in the
submissions from Marmen and Vestas.
Based on our analysis, we have
determined that it is appropriate to
disregard the opposition to the Petitions
from certain producer(s) pursuant to
section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act. When
the opposition to the Petitions is
disregarded, the industry support
requirements of section 732(c)(4)(A) of
the Act are satisfied.19
Based on our analysis and review of
the information on the record, we have
determined that the petitioner has
established industry support for the
19 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II; see also Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Aug 02, 2019
Jkt 247001
Petitions.20 The information on the
record demonstrates that the domestic
producers of wind towers who support
the Petitions account for at least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product and, once certain
opposition is disregarded, 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 Petitions.21 Accordingly, Commerce
determines that the Petitions were filed
on behalf of the domestic industry
within the meaning of section 732(b)(1)
of the Act.
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition,
the petitioner alleges that subject
imports from Canada, Indonesia, Korea,
and Vietnam each exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.22
The petitioner contends that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by a significant and
increasing volume of subject imports;
reduced market share; lost sales and lost
revenues; underselling and price
depression or suppression; negative
impact on the domestic industry’s
production, shipments, capacity
utilization, and employment; and
declining financial performance.23 We
have assessed the allegations and
supporting evidence regarding material
injury, threat of material injury,
causation, cumulation, as well as
negligibility, and we have determined
that these allegations are properly
supported by adequate evidence, and
meet the statutory requirements for
initiation.24
20 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II; see also Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
21 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II; see also Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
22 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 31–32 and
Exhibit I–17.
23 Id. at 15–16, 20–48 and Exhibits I–4, I–6, I–8,
I–9, I–14, I–17 and I–19 through I–28.
24 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and
Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada,
Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam (Attachment III); see also
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37995
Allegations of Sales at LTFV
The following is a description of the
allegation of sales at LTFV upon which
Commerce based its decision to initiate
AD investigations of imports of wind
towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea,
and Vietnam. The sources of data for the
deductions and adjustments relating to
U.S. price and normal value (NV) are
discussed in greater detail in the AD
Initiation Checklist for each country.
Export Price
For Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and
Vietnam, the petitioner based export
price (EP) on sales of wind towers
produced in, and exported from, those
countries and sold in the United States,
valued using the average unit values
(AUVs) of publicly available import
data.25 For Canada, the petitioner also
calculated EP based upon a sales offer
from a Canadian producer.26
Normal Value
For Canada, Indonesia, and Korea, the
petitioner was unable to obtain
information relating to the prices
charged for wind towers in Canada,
Indonesia, Korea, or any third country
market.27 Because home market and
third country prices were not reasonably
available, the petitioner calculated NV
based on constructed value (CV). For
further discussion of CV, see the section
‘‘Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value.’’ 28
With respect to Vietnam, Commerce
considers Vietnam to be an NME
country.29 In accordance with section
771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the
presumption of NME status remains in
effect until revoked by Commerce.
Therefore, we continue to treat Vietnam
Indonesia AD Checklist, at Attachment III; Korea
AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; and
Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
25 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist; Korea AD Initiation
Checklist; and Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
26 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
27 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation
Checklists.
28 In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade
Preferences Extension Act of 2015, amending
section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for this investigation,
Commerce will request information necessary to
calculate the CV and cost of production (COP) to
determine whether there are reasonable grounds to
believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like
product have been made at prices that represent
less than the COP of the product. Commerce no
longer requires a COP allegation to conduct this
analysis.
29 See Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Results and
Partial Rescission of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2014–2016, 82 FR 26050
(June 6, 2017), unchanged in Certain Steel Nails
from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final
Results of Antidumping Administrative Review;
2014–2016, 82 FR 45266 (September 28, 2017).
E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM
05AUN1
37996
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2019 / Notices
as an NME for purposes of the initiation
of this investigation. Accordingly, NV in
Vietnam is appropriately based on FOPs
and surrogate financial ratios from a
surrogate market economy country, in
accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act.30
The petitioner claims that India is an
appropriate surrogate country for
Vietnam, because it is a market
economy country that is at a level of
economic development comparable to
that of Vietnam, it is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise,
and public information from India is
available to value all material input
factors.31 Based on the information
provided by the petitioner, we
determine that it is appropriate to use
India as a surrogate country for
initiation purposes.
Interested parties will have the
opportunity to submit comments
regarding surrogate country selection
and, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an
opportunity to submit publicly available
information to value FOPs within 30
days before the scheduled date of the
preliminary determination.
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Factors of Production
Because information regarding the
volume of inputs consumed by the
Vietnamese producers/exporters is not
available, the petitioner relied on the
production experience of a U.S. wind
tower producer as an estimate of
Vietnamese manufacturers’ FOPs.32 The
petitioner valued the estimated FOPs
using surrogate values from India and
used the average POI exchange rate to
convert the data to U.S. dollars.33
Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value
As noted above, the petitioner was
unable to obtain information relating to
the prices charged for wind towers in
Canada, Indonesia, and Korea, or any
third country market; accordingly, the
petitioner based NV on CV.34 Pursuant
to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists
of the cost of manufacturing (COM),
selling, general, and administrative
(SG&A) expenses, financial expenses,
packing expenses, and profit. For
Canada, Indonesia, and Korea, the
petitioner calculated the COM based on
the input factors of production and
usage rates from a U.S. producer of
wind towers. The input factors of
30 See
Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
Volume V of the Petition at 10–13.
32 See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
33 Id.
34 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation
Checklist.
31 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Aug 02, 2019
Jkt 247001
production were valued using publicly
available data on costs specific to
Canada, Indonesia, and Korea during
the proposed POI.35 Specifically, the
prices for raw materials, reclaimed steel
scrap, and packing inputs were valued
using publicly available import data for
Canada, Indonesia, and Korea.36 Labor
and energy costs were valued using
publicly available sources for Canada,
Indonesia, and Korea.37 The petitioner
calculated factory overhead, SG&A, and
profit for Canada, Indonesia, and Korea
based on the average ratios found in the
experience of a producer of comparable
merchandise from each of these
countries.38
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the
Petitions there is reason to believe that
imports of wind towers from Canada,
Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at LTFV. Based on
comparisons of EP to NV in accordance
with sections 772 and 773 of the Act,
the estimated dumping margins for
wind towers for each of the countries
covered by this initiation are as follows:
(1) Canada—53.63 and 61.59 percent; 39
(2) Indonesia—26.00 and 47.19
percent; 40 (3) Korea—280.69 and 331.26
percent; 41 and (4) Vietnam—39.97 to
65.96 percent.42
Initiation of LTFV Investigations
Based upon the examination of the
Petitions and supplemental responses,
we find that the Petitions meet the
requirements of section 732 of the Act.
Therefore, we are initiating AD
investigations to determine whether
imports of wind towers from Canada,
Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at LTFV. In accordance
with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed,
we will make our preliminary
determinations no later than 140 days
after the date of this initiation.
35 See
Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation
Checklist.
36 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation
Checklist.
37 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation
Checklist.
38 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia
AD Initiation Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation
Checklist.
39 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
40 See Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist.
41 See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
42 See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Respondent Selection
The petitioner named four companies
in Canada,43 two companies in
Indonesia,44 and three companies in
Korea 45 as producers/exporters of wind
towers. Following standard practice in
AD investigations involving market
economy countries, 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 respondents in Canada and
Korea based on U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S.
imports under the appropriate
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) numbers listed
with the scope in the Appendix.46
On July 22, 2019, Commerce released
CBP data on imports of wind towers
from Canada, Korea, and Vietnam under
administrative protective order (APO) to
all parties with access to information
protected by APO and indicated that
interested parties wishing to comment
on the CBP data must do so within three
business days of the publication date of
the notice of initiation of these
investigations.47
The CBP data identified only one
company as a producer/exporter of
wind towers in Indonesia: PT Kenertec
Power System (Kenertec).48 Kenertec
was also identified in the petition as a
producer/exporter of wind towers from
Indonesia.49 Accordingly, because there
are no other producers/exporters
identified in the CBP data, Commerce
intends to examine the sole producer/
exporter identified in the CBP data.
Parties wishing to comment on the
selection of Kenertec as a mandatory
respondent must do so within three
days of the publication of this notice.
Any such comments must be submitted
no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the due
date and must be filed electronically via
ACCESS. Commerce will not accept
43 See
Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–16.
44 Id.
45 Id.
46 See, e.g., Polyester Textured Yarn from India
and the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of
Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 83 FR 58223,
58227 (November 19, 2018).
47 See Memorandum, ‘‘Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Canada: Release of Customs Data from U.S.
Customs and Border Protection,’’ dated July 22,
2019; Memorandum, ‘‘Utility Scale Wind Towers
from the Republic of Korea: Release of Customs
Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,’’
dated July 22, 2019; and Memorandum, ‘‘Utility
Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Data,’’ dated July 22, 2019.
48 See Memorandum, ‘‘Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Indonesia: Release of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection Data,’’ dated July 22, 2019.
49 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–16.
E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM
05AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2019 / Notices
rebuttal comments regarding the CBP
data or respondent selection.
The petitioner stated that CS Wind
Vietnam Co. (CS Wind) is the only
Vietnamese wind tower producer that is
not currently subject to the existing AD
order 50 on wind towers from Vietnam
and, thus, the only company for which
the Petition was filed with respect to
Vietnam.51 As such, we will not
conduct respondent selection based on
quantity and value (Q&V)
questionnaires as the Vietnam AD
investigation only applies to CS Wind.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status
in an NME investigation, exporters and
producers normally must submit a
separate-rate application.52 However,
applicants which have been selected as
mandatory respondents prior to the
deadline for submission of separate rate
applications are not required to file a
separate rate application. Because CS
Wind is the only company for which the
Petition was filed with respect to
Vietnam, CS Wind will be eligible for
consideration for separate-rate status
only if it responds to all parts of
Commerce’s AD questionnaire as a
mandatory respondent.
Use of Combination Rates
Commerce will calculate combination
rates for certain respondents that are
eligible for a separate rate in an NME
investigation. The Separate Rates and
Combination Rates Bulletin states:
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
{w}hile continuing the practice of assigning
separate rates only to exporters, all separate
rates that the Department will now assign in
its NME Investigation will be specific to
those producers that supplied the exporter
during the period of investigation. Note,
however, that one rate is calculated for the
exporter and all of the producers which
supplied subject merchandise to it during the
period of investigation. This practice applies
both to mandatory respondents receiving an
individually calculated separate rate as well
as the pool of non-investigated firms
receiving the weighted-average of the
individually calculated rates. This practice is
referred to as the application of ‘‘combination
rates’’ because such rates apply to specific
combinations of exporters and one or more
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to
an exporter will apply only to merchandise
both exported by the firm in question and
50 See Utility Scale Wind Towers from the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Amended Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order, 78 FR 11150 (February
15, 2013).
51 See Volume I of the Petitions at 1 n.1.
52 See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates
Practice and Application of Combination Rates in
Antidumping Investigation involving Non-Market
Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf
(Policy Bulletin 05.1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Aug 02, 2019
Jkt 247001
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter
during the period of investigation.53
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the Petitions have been provided to
the governments of Canada, Indonesia,
Korea, and Vietnam via ACCESS. To the
extent practicable, we will attempt to
provide a copy of the public version of
the Petitions to each exporter named in
the Petitions as provided under 19 CFR
351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
within 45 days after the date on which
the Petitions were filed, whether there
is a reasonable indication that imports
of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia,
Korea, and/or Vietnam are materially
injuring, or threatening material injury
to, a U.S. industry.54 A negative ITC
determination for any country will
result in the investigation being
terminated with respect to that
country.55 Otherwise, the investigations
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). Section 351.301(b)
of Commerce’s regulations requires any
party, when submitting factual
information, to specify under which
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the
information is being submitted 56 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.57 Time limits for the
submission of factual information are
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which
53 See
54 See
37997
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 these
investigations.
Particular Market Situation Allegation
Section 504 of the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015 amended the Act
by adding the concept of particular
market situation (PMS) for purposes of
CV under section 773(e) of the Act.58
Section 773(e) of the Act states that ‘‘if
a particular market situation exists such
that the cost of materials and fabrication
or other processing of any kind does not
accurately reflect the cost of production
in the ordinary course of trade, the
administering authority may use
another calculation methodology under
this subtitle or any other calculation
methodology.’’ When an interested
party submits a PMS allegation pursuant
to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce
will respond to such a submission
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v).
If Commerce finds that a PMS exists
under section 773(e) of the Act, then it
will modify its dumping calculations
appropriately.
Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor
19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a deadline
for the submission of PMS allegations
and supporting factual information.
However, in order to administer section
773(e) of the Act, Commerce must
receive PMS allegations and supporting
factual information with enough time to
consider the submission. Thus, should
an interested party wish to submit a
PMS allegation and supporting new
factual information pursuant to section
773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later
than 20 days after submission of a
respondent’s initial section D
questionnaire response.
Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6.
section 733(a) of the Act.
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
19 CFR 351.301(b).
19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
58 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015,
Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
55 Id.
56 See
57 See
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM
05AUN1
37998
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2019 / Notices
from multiple parties simultaneously. In
such a case, we will inform parties in a
letter or memorandum of 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 untimelyfiled 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-201309-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to
submitting factual information in these
investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.59
Parties must use the certification
formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).60 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 these investigations
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: July 29, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix—Scope of the Investigations
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
The merchandise covered by these
investigations consists of certain wind
towers, whether or not tapered, and sections
thereof. Certain wind towers support the
nacelle and rotor blades in a wind turbine
with a minimum rated electrical power
generation capacity in excess of 100 kilowatts
and with a minimum height of 50 meters
measured from the base of the tower to the
bottom of the nacelle (i.e., where the top of
the tower and nacelle are joined) when fully
assembled.
A wind tower section consists of, at a
minimum, multiple steel plates rolled into
cylindrical or conical shapes and welded
together (or otherwise attached) to form a
steel shell, regardless of coating, end-finish,
painting, treatment, or method of
manufacture, and with or without flanges,
doors, or internal or external components
(e.g., flooring/decking, ladders, lifts,
electrical buss boxes, electrical cabling,
conduit, cable harness for nacelle generator,
interior lighting, tool and storage lockers)
attached to the wind tower section. Several
wind tower sections are normally required to
form a completed wind tower.
Wind towers and sections thereof are
included within the scope whether or not
they are joined with nonsubject merchandise,
such as nacelles or rotor blades, and whether
or not they have internal or external
components attached to the subject
merchandise.
Specifically excluded from the scope are
nacelles and rotor blades, regardless of
whether they are attached to the wind tower.
Also excluded are any internal or external
components which are not attached to the
wind towers or sections thereof, unless those
components are shipped with the tower
sections.
Further, excluded from the scope of the
antidumping duty investigations are any
products covered by the existing
antidumping duty order on utility scale wind
towers from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam. See Utility Scale Wind Towers from
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Amended
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 78
FR 11150 (February 15, 2013).
Merchandise covered by these
investigations is currently classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS) under subheading
7308.20.0020 or 8502.31.0000. Wind towers
of iron or steel are classified under HTSUS
7308.20.0020 when imported separately as a
tower or tower section(s). Wind towers may
be classified under HTSUS 8502.31.0000
when imported as combination goods with a
wind turbine (i.e., accompanying nacelles
and/or rotor blades). While the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of the investigations
is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2019–16655 Filed 8–2–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
59 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). 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.
60 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Aug 02, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–549–837]
Glycine From Thailand: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Final Affirmative
Determination of Critical
Circumstances in Part
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) determines that glycine
from Thailand is being, or is likely to be,
sold in the United States at less than fair
value (LTFV). In addition, Commerce
determines that critical circumstances
exist with respect to certain imports of
the subject merchandise. The period of
investigation (POI) is January 1, 2017
through December 31, 2017. The final
estimated weighted-average dumping
margins are listed below in the ‘‘Final
Determination’’ section of this notice.
DATES: Applicable August 5, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Smith or Jesus Saenz, AD/CVD,
AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–1766 or
(202) 482–8184, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
The petitioners in this investigation
are GEO Specialty Chemicals, Inc. and
Chattem Chemicals, Inc. (collectively,
the petitioners). The mandatory
respondent in this investigation is
Newtrend Food Ingredient (Thailand)
Co., Ltd. (Newtrend Thailand).
The events that occurred since
Commerce published the Preliminary
Determination 1 on October 31, 2018
and postponed the final determination
until March 15, 2019 are discussed in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2
Commerce exercised its discretion to
toll all deadlines affected by the partial
federal government closure from
1 See Glycine from Thailand Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Not Less Than Fair Value,
Preliminary Negative Determination of Critical
Circumstances, Postponement of Final
Determination, 83 FR 54717 (October 31, 2018)
(Preliminary Determination), and accompanying
Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
2 See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Determination in the
Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Glycine from
Thailand,’’ dated concurrently with, and hereby
adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
E:\FR\FM\05AUN1.SGM
05AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 150 (Monday, August 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37992-37998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16655]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-122-867, A-560-833, A-580-902, A-552-825]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of
Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-
Fair-Value Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable July 29, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney at (202) 482-4475
(Canada); Brittany Bauer (202) 482-3860 (Indonesia); Rebecca Janz at
(202) 482-2972 (Republic of Korea (Korea)); and Edythe Artman at (202)
482-3931 (Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam)); AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On July 9, 2019, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of utility
scale wind towers (wind towers) from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and
Vietnam, filed in proper form on behalf of the Wind Tower Trade
Coalition (the petitioner).\1\ The Petitions were accompanied by
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of wind towers
from Canada, Indonesia, and Vietnam.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam,'' dated July 9, 2019 (the Petitions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37993]]
During the period July 12 through 22, 2019, Commerce requested
supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions
in separate supplemental questionnaires.\2\ The petitioner filed
responses to the supplemental questionnaires between July 16 and 24,
2019.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Utility Scale
Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia, and the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Supplemental Questions,'' dated July 12, 2019; and,
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada: Supplemental Questions,''
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia: Supplemental Questions,''
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental
Questions,'' and ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties
on Imports of Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Supplemental Questions,'' all dated July 15, 2019; see
also Memoranda, ``Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' dated
July 15, 2019; ``Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' dated
July 18, 2019; and, ``Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,''
dated July 22, 2019.
\3\ See Petitioner's Letters, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Responses to First Supplemental Questions on Common
Issues and Injury Volume I of the Petition,'' dated July 16, 2019
(General Issues Supplement); ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada: Responses to First Supplemental Questions on Canada Volume
II of the Petition,'' ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia:
Responses to First Supplemental Questions on Indonesia Volume III of
the Petition,'' and Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Responses to First Supplemental Questions on
Vietnam Volume V of the Petition,'' each dated July 18, 2019;
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea: Responses to
First Supplemental Questions on Korea Volume IV of the Petition,''
dated July 19, 2019; ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada,
Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Responses to Second Supplemental Questions on Common Issues
and Injury Volume I of the Petition,'' dated July 19, 2019 (Scope
Supplement); ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada: Responses to
Second Supplemental Questions on Canada Volume II of the Petition,''
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia: Responses to Second
Supplemental Questions on Indonesia Volume III of the Petition,''
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea: Responses to
Second Supplemental Questions on Volume IV of the Petition,'' and
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Responses to Second Supplemental Questions on Vietnam Volume V of
the Petition,'' each dated July 24, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of wind towers
from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam are being, or are likely to
be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) within the
meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that imports of such products
are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the
domestic wind tower industry in the United States. Consistent with
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by
information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its
allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of
the domestic industry, because the petitioner is an interested party,
as defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act. Commerce also finds that
the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support necessary for
the initiation of the requested AD investigations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petitions'' section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Periods of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on July 9, 2019, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the Canada,
Indonesia, and Korea investigations is July 1, 2018 through June 30,
2019. Because Vietnam is a non-market economy (NME) country, pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI for the Vietnam investigation is
January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019.
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is wind towers from
Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam. For a full description of the
scope of these investigations, see the Appendix to this notice.
Scope Comments
During our review of the Petitions, we contacted the petitioner
regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the
Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the
domestic industry is seeking relief.\5\ As a result, the scope of the
Petitions was modified to clarify the description of the merchandise
covered by the Petitions. The description of the merchandise covered by
these investigations, as described in the Appendix to this notice,
reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See General Issues Supplement; see also Memorandum, ``Phone
Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' dated July 18, 2019; and
Scope Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding
product coverage (i.e., scope).\6\ 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,\7\ all
such factual information should be limited to public information. To
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that
all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time
(ET) on August 19, 2019, which is 20 calendar days from the signature
date of this notice.\8\ Any rebuttal comments, which may include
factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 29, 2019,
which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
\8\ Because the deadline falls on a Sunday (i.e., August 18,
2019), the deadline becomes the next business day (i.e., August 19,
2019).
\9\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce requests that any factual information the parties consider
relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this
time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional
factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may
be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to
submit the additional information. All such comments must also be filed
on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\10\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 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, effective 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Product Characteristics
Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment
on the appropriate physical characteristics
[[Page 37994]]
of wind towers to be reported in response to Commerce's AD
questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key
physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to develop
appropriate product-comparison criteria, as well as to report the
relevant factors of production (FOPs) accurately.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product
characteristics, and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it
is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product
comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers
to describe wind towers, it may be that only a select few product
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching
products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics
last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 19,
2019, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this
notice.\11\ Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on
August 29, 2019. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of each
of the AD investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b). Because the deadline falls on a
Sunday (i.e., August 18, 2019), the deadline becomes the next
business day (i.e., August 19, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, 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 Act 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,\12\ 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 differences do not
render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\13\ See, e.g., 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 Petitions.\14\ Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that wind towers, as
defined in the scope, constitute a single domestic like product, and we
have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like
product.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17-18 and Exhibits I-9
and I-14; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1-2 and Exhibit I-
Supp-2; and Scope Supplement, at 1 and Exhibit I-Supp2-1.
\15\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility
Scale Wind Towers from Canada (Canada AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam (Attachment II); Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia
(Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers
from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam (Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These
checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and are on file
electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is
also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main
Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 26, 2019, we received industry support challenges from
Marmen Energy Co. (Marmen) and Vestas Towers America, Inc. (Vestas),
U.S. producers of wind towers.\16\ On July 29, 2019, the petitioner
responded to the standing challenges from Marmen and Vestas.\17\ Based
on information provided in the Petitions and in the letters from Marmen
and Vestas, the share of total U.S. production of the domestic like
product in calendar year 2018 represented by the supporters of the
Petitions did not account for more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product. Therefore, in accordance with
section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, we relied on other information to
determine industry support.\18\ In determining whether the petitioner
has standing under sections 732(c)(4)(A) and 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act,
we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions and
other information on the record with
[[Page 37995]]
reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ``Scope of the
Investigations,'' in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry
support, the petitioner provided its own 2018 production of the
domestic like product, as well as the 2018 production by the supporters
of the Petitions. Other information on the record establishes the total
2018 production of other U.S. producers of the domestic like product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Marmen's Letter, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Standing Challenge,'' dated July 26, 2019 (Marmen
Letter); see also Vestas' Letter, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, South Korea, and Vietnam: Vestas Towers America,
Inc.'s Comments on Industry Support,'' dated July 26, 2019 (Vestas
Letter).
\17\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Response to Standing Challenge and Comments on Industry
Support,'' dated July 29, 2019 (Petitioner Letter).
\18\ For further discussion, see Canada AD Initiation Checklist,
at Attachment II; see also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II; Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and
Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act states that (i) Commerce ``shall
disregard the position of domestic producers who oppose the petition if
such producers are related to foreign producers, as defined in section
771(4)(B)(ii), unless such domestic producers demonstrate that their
interests as domestic producers would be adversely affected by the
imposition of an antidumping duty order;'' and (ii) Commerce ``may
disregard the position of domestic producers of a domestic like product
who are importers of the subject merchandise.'' In addition, 19 CFR
351.203(e)(4) states that the position of a domestic producer that
opposes the petition (i) will be disregarded if such producer is
related to a foreign producer or to a foreign exporter under section
771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act, unless such domestic producer demonstrates to
the Secretary's satisfaction that its interests as a domestic producer
would be adversely affected by the imposition of an antidumping order;
and (ii) may be disregarded if the producer is an importer of the
subject merchandise or is related to such an importer under section
771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act. Certain producers of the domestic like
product that opposed the Petitions are related to foreign producers
and/or imported subject merchandise from the subject countries. We have
analyzed the information provided by the petitioner and information
provided in the submissions from Marmen and Vestas. Based on our
analysis, we have determined that it is appropriate to disregard the
opposition to the Petitions from certain producer(s) pursuant to
section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act. When the opposition to the Petitions
is disregarded, the industry support requirements of section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act are satisfied.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see
also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our analysis and review of the information on the record,
we have determined that the petitioner has established industry support
for the Petitions.\20\ The information on the record demonstrates that
the domestic producers of wind towers who support the Petitions account
for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like
product and, once certain opposition is disregarded, 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 Petitions.\21\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the
Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the
meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see
also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
\21\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see
also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition, the petitioner alleges that
subject imports from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam each exceed
the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of
the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 31-32 and Exhibit I-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports;
reduced market share; lost sales and lost revenues; underselling and
price depression or suppression; negative impact on the domestic
industry's production, shipments, capacity utilization, and employment;
and declining financial performance.\23\ We have assessed the
allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat
of material injury, causation, cumulation, as well as negligibility,
and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by
adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for
initiation.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Id. at 15-16, 20-48 and Exhibits I-4, I-6, I-8, I-9, I-14,
I-17 and I-19 through I-28.
\24\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia, the
Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Attachment
III); see also Indonesia AD Checklist, at Attachment III; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations of Sales at LTFV
The following is a description of the allegation of sales at LTFV
upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate AD investigations of
imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam. The
sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S.
price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the AD
Initiation Checklist for each country.
Export Price
For Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam, the petitioner based
export price (EP) on sales of wind towers produced in, and exported
from, those countries and sold in the United States, valued using the
average unit values (AUVs) of publicly available import data.\25\ For
Canada, the petitioner also calculated EP based upon a sales offer from
a Canadian producer.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; Korea AD Initiation Checklist; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist.
\26\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
For Canada, Indonesia, and Korea, the petitioner was unable to
obtain information relating to the prices charged for wind towers in
Canada, Indonesia, Korea, or any third country market.\27\ Because home
market and third country prices were not reasonably available, the
petitioner calculated NV based on constructed value (CV). For further
discussion of CV, see the section ``Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklists.
\28\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for
this investigation, Commerce will request information necessary to
calculate the CV and cost of production (COP) to determine whether
there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the
foreign like product have been made at prices that represent less
than the COP of the product. Commerce no longer requires a COP
allegation to conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to Vietnam, Commerce considers Vietnam to be an NME
country.\29\ In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the
presumption of NME status remains in effect until revoked by Commerce.
Therefore, we continue to treat Vietnam
[[Page 37996]]
as an NME for purposes of the initiation of this investigation.
Accordingly, NV in Vietnam is appropriately based on FOPs and surrogate
financial ratios from a surrogate market economy country, in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2016, 82 FR 26050 (June
6, 2017), unchanged in Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative
Review; 2014-2016, 82 FR 45266 (September 28, 2017).
\30\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner claims that India is an appropriate surrogate
country for Vietnam, because it is a market economy country that is at
a level of economic development comparable to that of Vietnam, it is a
significant producer of comparable merchandise, and public information
from India is available to value all material input factors.\31\ Based
on the information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is
appropriate to use India as a surrogate country for initiation
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Volume V of the Petition at 10-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled
date of the preliminary determination.
Factors of Production
Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the
Vietnamese producers/exporters is not available, the petitioner relied
on the production experience of a U.S. wind tower producer as an
estimate of Vietnamese manufacturers' FOPs.\32\ The petitioner valued
the estimated FOPs using surrogate values from India and used the
average POI exchange rate to convert the data to U.S. dollars.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
\33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
As noted above, the petitioner was unable to obtain information
relating to the prices charged for wind towers in Canada, Indonesia,
and Korea, or any third country market; accordingly, the petitioner
based NV on CV.\34\ Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists
of the cost of manufacturing (COM), selling, general, and
administrative (SG&A) expenses, financial expenses, packing expenses,
and profit. For Canada, Indonesia, and Korea, the petitioner calculated
the COM based on the input factors of production and usage rates from a
U.S. producer of wind towers. The input factors of production were
valued using publicly available data on costs specific to Canada,
Indonesia, and Korea during the proposed POI.\35\ Specifically, the
prices for raw materials, reclaimed steel scrap, and packing inputs
were valued using publicly available import data for Canada, Indonesia,
and Korea.\36\ Labor and energy costs were valued using publicly
available sources for Canada, Indonesia, and Korea.\37\ The petitioner
calculated factory overhead, SG&A, and profit for Canada, Indonesia,
and Korea based on the average ratios found in the experience of a
producer of comparable merchandise from each of these countries.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\35\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\36\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\37\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\38\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the Petitions there is reason to
believe that imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and
Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at
LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772
and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for wind towers for
each of the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1)
Canada--53.63 and 61.59 percent; \39\ (2) Indonesia--26.00 and 47.19
percent; \40\ (3) Korea--280.69 and 331.26 percent; \41\ and (4)
Vietnam--39.97 to 65.96 percent.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
\40\ See Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist.
\41\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\42\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of LTFV Investigations
Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental
responses, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section
732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to
determine whether imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea,
and Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States
at LTFV. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary
determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Respondent Selection
The petitioner named four companies in Canada,\43\ two companies in
Indonesia,\44\ and three companies in Korea \45\ as producers/exporters
of wind towers. Following standard practice in AD investigations
involving market economy countries, 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 respondents in Canada and Korea
based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports
under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) numbers listed with the scope in the Appendix.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-16.
\44\ Id.
\45\ Id.
\46\ See, e.g., Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigations, 83 FR 58223, 58227 (November 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 22, 2019, Commerce released CBP data on imports of wind
towers from Canada, Korea, and Vietnam under administrative protective
order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO
and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP
data must do so within three business days of the publication date of
the notice of initiation of these investigations.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Memorandum, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada:
Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,''
dated July 22, 2019; Memorandum, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
the Republic of Korea: Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and
Border Protection,'' dated July 22, 2019; and Memorandum, ``Utility
Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: U.S.
Customs and Border Protection Data,'' dated July 22, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CBP data identified only one company as a producer/exporter of
wind towers in Indonesia: PT Kenertec Power System (Kenertec).\48\
Kenertec was also identified in the petition as a producer/exporter of
wind towers from Indonesia.\49\ Accordingly, because there are no other
producers/exporters identified in the CBP data, Commerce intends to
examine the sole producer/exporter identified in the CBP data. Parties
wishing to comment on the selection of Kenertec as a mandatory
respondent must do so within three days of the publication of this
notice. Any such comments must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. ET
on the due date and must be filed electronically via ACCESS. Commerce
will not accept
[[Page 37997]]
rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See Memorandum, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia:
Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data,'' dated July 22,
2019.
\49\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner stated that CS Wind Vietnam Co. (CS Wind) is the
only Vietnamese wind tower producer that is not currently subject to
the existing AD order \50\ on wind towers from Vietnam and, thus, the
only company for which the Petition was filed with respect to
Vietnam.\51\ As such, we will not conduct respondent selection based on
quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires as the Vietnam AD investigation
only applies to CS Wind.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 78 FR 11150 (February 15, 2013).
\51\ See Volume I of the Petitions at 1 n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation,
exporters and producers normally must submit a separate-rate
application.\52\ However, applicants which have been selected as
mandatory respondents prior to the deadline for submission of separate
rate applications are not required to file a separate rate application.
Because CS Wind is the only company for which the Petition was filed
with respect to Vietnam, CS Wind will be eligible for consideration for
separate-rate status only if it responds to all parts of Commerce's AD
questionnaire as a mandatory respondent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin
05.1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Combination Rates
Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents
that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The
Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:
{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now
assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those producers
that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note,
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period
of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory
respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as
well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-
average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is
referred to as the application of ``combination rates'' because such
rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply
only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of
investigation.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been
provided to the governments of Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam
via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a
copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in
the Petitions as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea,
and/or Vietnam are materially injuring, or threatening material injury
to, a U.S. industry.\54\ A negative ITC determination for any country
will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that
country.\55\ Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\55\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information
is being submitted \56\ 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.\57\ 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 these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\57\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particular Market Situation Allegation
Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended
the Act by adding the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for
purposes of CV under section 773(e) of the Act.\58\ Section 773(e) of
the Act states that ``if a particular market situation exists such that
the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind
does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary
course of trade, the administering authority may use another
calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation
methodology.'' When an interested party submits a PMS allegation
pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a
submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds
that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify
its dumping calculations appropriately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a
deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual
information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act,
Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual
information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should
an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new
factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do
so no later than 20 days after submission of a respondent's initial
section D questionnaire response.
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
[[Page 37998]]
from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform
parties in a letter or memorandum of 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 these investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\59\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).\60\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\60\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 these investigations 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: July 29, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these investigations consists of
certain wind towers, whether or not tapered, and sections thereof.
Certain wind towers support the nacelle and rotor blades in a wind
turbine with a minimum rated electrical power generation capacity in
excess of 100 kilowatts and with a minimum height of 50 meters
measured from the base of the tower to the bottom of the nacelle
(i.e., where the top of the tower and nacelle are joined) when fully
assembled.
A wind tower section consists of, at a minimum, multiple steel
plates rolled into cylindrical or conical shapes and welded together
(or otherwise attached) to form a steel shell, regardless of
coating, end-finish, painting, treatment, or method of manufacture,
and with or without flanges, doors, or internal or external
components (e.g., flooring/decking, ladders, lifts, electrical buss
boxes, electrical cabling, conduit, cable harness for nacelle
generator, interior lighting, tool and storage lockers) attached to
the wind tower section. Several wind tower sections are normally
required to form a completed wind tower.
Wind towers and sections thereof are included within the scope
whether or not they are joined with nonsubject merchandise, such as
nacelles or rotor blades, and whether or not they have internal or
external components attached to the subject merchandise.
Specifically excluded from the scope are nacelles and rotor
blades, regardless of whether they are attached to the wind tower.
Also excluded are any internal or external components which are not
attached to the wind towers or sections thereof, unless those
components are shipped with the tower sections.
Further, excluded from the scope of the antidumping duty
investigations are any products covered by the existing antidumping
duty order on utility scale wind towers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam. See Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 78 FR 11150 (February
15, 2013).
Merchandise covered by these investigations is currently
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) under subheading 7308.20.0020 or 8502.31.0000. Wind towers
of iron or steel are classified under HTSUS 7308.20.0020 when
imported separately as a tower or tower section(s). Wind towers may
be classified under HTSUS 8502.31.0000 when imported as combination
goods with a wind turbine (i.e., accompanying nacelles and/or rotor
blades). While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the
investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2019-16655 Filed 8-2-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
