Determination on the Exclusion of Bifacial Solar Panels From the Safeguard Measure on Solar Products, 21497-21499 [2020-08189]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 75 / Friday, April 17, 2020 / Notices
parties, or the public. Under 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A), federal agencies are
required to provide, prior to an agency’s
submitting a collection to OMB for
approval, a 60-day notice and comment
period through publication in the
Federal Register concerning each
proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an
existing collection of information.
Dated: April 14, 2020.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2020–08163 Filed 4–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
[Docket No. USTR–2020–0001]
Determination on the Exclusion of
Bifacial Solar Panels From the
Safeguard Measure on Solar Products
Office of the United States
Trade Representative.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
On January 23, 2018, the
President imposed a safeguard measure
on imports of certain solar products
pursuant to a Section 201 investigation.
On February 14, 2018, the U.S. Trade
Representative established procedures
for interested persons to request
product-specific exclusions from
application of the safeguard measure
and to comment on the submitted
requests. Based on the requests and
comments received, the U.S. Trade
Representative granted certain requests
on June 13, 2019, including a request to
exclude from the safeguard measure
bifacial solar panels that consist only of
bifacial solar cells. On January 27, 2020,
the U.S. Trade Representative
established procedures to consider
whether to maintain, withdraw, or take
some other action with respect to the
exclusion of bifacial solar panels from
the safeguard measure. Based on an
evaluation of the comments received,
and responses to those comments, and
in consultation with the Secretaries of
Commerce and Energy, the U.S. Trade
Representative has determined that the
bifacial solar panel exclusion is
undermining the objectives of the
safeguard measure. Accordingly, the
U.S. Trade Representative will request
that the U.S. Court of International
Trade lift the order preliminarily
enjoining the withdrawal from entering
into effect.
DATES: Withdrawal of the exclusion for
bifacial solar panels from application of
the safeguard measure will apply to
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:19 Apr 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
imported panels if the Court lifts the
preliminary injunction but in no case
earlier than May 18, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Victor Mroczka, Office of WTO and
Multilateral Affairs, at vmroczka@
ustr.eop.gov or (202) 395–9450, or Dax
Terrill, Office of General Counsel, at
Dax.Terrill@ustr.eop.gov or (202) 395–
4739.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On January 23, 2018, the President
issued Proclamation 9693 (83 FR 3541)
to impose a safeguard measure under
section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2251) with respect to certain
crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and
other products containing these cells.
The Proclamation directed the U.S.
Trade Representative to establish
procedures for interested persons to
request product-specific exclusions
from the safeguard measure. It also
authorized the U.S. Trade
Representative, after consultation with
the Secretaries of Commerce and
Energy, to exclude products upon
publication of a notice in the Federal
Register modifying the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS).
On February 14, 2018, the U.S. Trade
Representative established procedures
to request a product exclusion and
opened a public docket. See 83 FR 6670
(February 2018 notice). Under the
February 2018 notice, requests for
exclusion were to identify the particular
product in terms of its physical
characteristics (such as dimensions,
wattage, material composition, or other
distinguishing characteristics) that
differentiate it from other products
subject to the safeguard measure. The
February 2018 notice provided that the
U.S. Trade Representative would not
consider requests identifying the
product at issue in terms of the identity
of the producer, importer, or ultimate
consumer; the country of origin; or
trademarks or tradenames. The notice
also confirmed that the U.S. Trade
Representative only would grant
exclusions that did not undermine the
objectives of the safeguard measure. The
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative
(USTR) received 48 product exclusion
requests and 213 comments responding
to the various requests. The exclusion
requests generally fell into seven
categories, one of which concerned
bifacial solar panels.
On September 19, 2018, and June 13,
2019, the U.S. Trade Representative
granted certain product exclusion
requests and modified the HTSUS
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21497
accordingly. See 83 FR 47393 and 84 FR
27684. The notice published on June 13,
2019 (June 2019 notice) excluded from
application of the safeguard measure
‘‘bifacial solar panels that absorb light
and generate electricity on each side of
the panel and that consist of only
bifacial solar cells that absorb light and
generate electricity on each side of the
cells.’’
On October 9, 2019, the U.S. Trade
Representative concluded, based on an
evaluation of newly available
information and after consultation with
the Secretaries of Commerce and
Energy, that maintaining the exclusion
would undermine the objectives of the
safeguard measure. Accordingly, the
U.S. Trade Representative published a
notice withdrawing the exclusion of
bifacial solar panels, effective as of
October 28, 2019. See 84 FR 54244.
On October 21, 2019, Invenergy
Renewables LLC (Invenergy) filed a
complaint with the U.S. Court of
International Trade alleging that USTR
failed to provide notice and comment
required under the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551 et
seq., before withdrawing the exclusion
of bifacial solar panels. Invenergy filed
a motion for a preliminary injunction to
prevent the withdrawal from entering
into effect. The Court issued a
preliminary injunction on December 5,
2019, enjoining the U.S. Trade
Representative from withdrawing the
exclusion on bifacial solar panels from
the safeguard measure.
On January 27, 2020 (85 FR 4756), the
U.S. Trade Representative issued a
notice (January 2020 notice) noting
concerns that:
1. The bifacial solar panel exclusion
will result in significant increases in
imports of bifacial solar panels and
therefore will undermine the objectives
of the safeguard measure.
2. The precise definition of bifacial
solar panels excluded from the
safeguard measure may require
clarification.
3. The exclusion in the June 2019
notice is broader than the category of
products described in the exclusion
requests submitted as of March 16,
2018.
The U.S. Trade Representative
established procedures and opened a
public docket to seek comment on
whether to maintain the exclusion of
bifacial solar panels from the safeguard
measure, withdraw the exclusion, or
take some other action with respect to
this exclusion. The January 2020 notice
confirmed that the U.S. Trade
Representative would request the Court
to lift the injunction if he determined
that it would be appropriate to
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
21498
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 75 / Friday, April 17, 2020 / Notices
withdraw the bifacial exclusion or take
some other action with respect to this
exclusion.
In the January 2020 notice, the U.S.
Trade Representative specifically
requested information or views
regarding the following, with sufficient
evidence to support a particular
position:
• Global and United States
production and production capacity for
bifacial solar panels prior to and
following the exclusion of these
products in the June 2019 notice, along
with any information on expected
changes in production and production
capacity for the remaining term of the
safeguard measure (i.e., until February
6, 2022).
• Projections for the production and
importation into the United States of
bifacial solar panels for the remaining
term of the safeguard measure.
• Import data and entry
documentation to establish the level of
bifacial solar panels imported into the
United States prior to and following the
exclusion of these products in the June
2019 notice.
• Projections of demand for bifacial
solar panels by companies building or
planning to build solar facilities or
otherwise to install bifacial solar panels.
• Contracts, purchase orders, or other
agreements that establish sales or other
transactions, including those between
suppliers and customers, regarding
bifacial solar panels that have been or
will be imported into the United States
or will be produced in the United
States.
• Production cost and price
differential between the manufacture
and distribution of monofacial and
bifacial solar panels.
• Substitutability or competitiveness
between monofacial and bifacial solar
panels in the United States.
• Domestic production and
production capacity of bifacial solar
cells or bifacial solar panels in the
United States.
• Whether the U.S. Trade
Representative should modify the
exclusion to implement a tariff-rate
quota (TRQ) on the importation of
bifacial solar panels that enter with no
additional duty and, if so, the level (e.g.,
in megawatts) of that TRQ.
• The potential impact, if any, on the
domestic workforce and economy in
general should the exclusion be
withdrawn.
• Any other information or data that
interested persons consider relevant to
the U.S. Trade Representative’s
evaluation.
USTR received 15 comments
regarding the bifacial exclusion and 49
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:19 Apr 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
subsequent comments responding to the
initial comments. The determination
below is based on these comments.
The U.S. International Trade
Commission (ITC) issued a report in
March 2020 (March Report) in response
to a request from the U.S. Trade
Representative for advice regarding
potential modifications to the safeguard
measure, which provided certain
information with regard to the bifacial
exclusion. In the March report, the ITC
found that bifacial panels are projected
to gain a large share of total demand in
the coming years due to their powergeneration advantages and relative cost
competitiveness with monofacial
panels—particularly the price advantage
that the bifacial exclusion conferred
upon them. See ITC March Report, at
ES–5. Accordingly, the ITC found that
the bifacial exclusion (a) likely will
result in substantial increases in imports
of bifacial panels, and (b) that these
products likely will compete with
domestically produced solar products in
the U.S. market. See ITC March Report,
at I–4 and 5.
B. Determination Regarding the Bifacial
Exclusion
Section 201(a) provides that, when
the ITC finds that increased imports are
causing or threatening serious injury to
a domestic industry, the President
‘‘shall take all appropriate and feasible
action within his power which the
President determines will facilitate
efforts by the domestic industry to make
a positive adjustment to import
competition and provide greater
economic and social benefits than
costs.’’ Proclamation 9693 provided that
‘‘[i]f the USTR determines, after
consultation with the Secretaries of
Commerce and Energy, that a particular
product should be excluded, the USTR
is authorized, upon publishing a notice
of such determination in the Federal
Register, to modify the HTS provisions
created by the Annex to this
proclamation to exclude such particular
product from the safeguard measure.’’
The February 2018 notice provided that
the U.S. Trade Representative would
‘‘grant only those exclusions that do not
undermine the objectives of the
safeguard measures,’’ which signifies
that an exclusion is not appropriate if it
would interfere with the domestic
industry’s ‘‘positive adjustment to
import competition.’’ The information
and comments provided in response to
the January 2020 notice indicate that the
bifacial exclusion is doing this.
Specifically, the information and
comments support the following
findings:
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1. Global capacity to produce bifacial
solar panels is likely to increase
significantly over the next three years.
2. As bifacial solar panel production
currently is low in the United States,
and the vast majority of bifacial solar
panel capacity is foreign, allowing
import of bifacial solar panels free of
safeguard tariffs disincentivizes U.S.
producers from converting existing
monofacial production to bifacial
production or opening new bifacial
production.
3. Imports of bifacial solar panels
were rising even before the bifacial
exclusion and continued to increase
after the exclusion.
4. Demand both globally and
domestically for bifacial solar panels is
likely to increase significantly for at
least the next three years.
5. The cost of producing bifacial solar
panels is not more than 10 percent
higher than the cost of producing
monofacial panels.
6. Bifacial solar panels and
monofacial solar panels are substitutes
from the perspective of utilities
planning solar generating facilities in
locations where both are costcompetitive with conventional forms of
energy.
7. Bifacial solar panels are expected to
offer a 5 to 10 percent improvement in
energy output over a same-size
monofacial panel, and removing the
safeguard tariff will enable their sale for
prices below those of monofacial panels,
which will depress prices for
monofacial panels.
8. The proposed TRQ for bifacial solar
panels would allow importation of
massive quantities of bifacial solar
panels and therefore would duplicate
the negative effects of the bifacial
exclusion.
9. Competition from low-priced
imports prevented domestic producers
from selling significant quantities of
solar panels in the utility segment
during the ITC’s original investigation
period, and low-priced imports of
bifacial solar panels due to the
exclusion are likely to have a similar
effect under current market conditions.
Moreover, bifacial solar panels are an
innovative technology that represents a
major area of growth for all producers of
solar products. Utilities are the largest
and most rapidly growing purchasers of
solar panels in the United States. By
disincentivizing domestic producers’
production of bifacial solar panels,
interfering with their ability to increase
sales of monofacial and bifacial
products into the utility segment, and
having a depressive effect on prices for
monofacial solar panels, the bifacial
exclusion is hindering the domestic
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 75 / Friday, April 17, 2020 / Notices
industry’s adjustment to import
competition.
Therefore, the U.S. Trade
Representative has determined that the
bifacial exclusion is undermining the
objective of the safeguard measure on
solar products, does not meet the
criteria for a legitimate exclusion, and
should be withdrawn. The U.S. Trade
Representative has found further and
additionally that the findings in the ITC
March Report support the conclusion
that the bifacial exclusion is
undermining the objectives of the
safeguard measure.
C. Consultation With Other
Government Agencies
As with the initial determination to
exclude bifacial solar panels from the
safeguard measure, the U.S. Trade
Representative consulted with the
Secretaries of Commerce and Energy
regarding the comments, responses, and
supporting evidence received with
respect to the January 2020 notice to
reach this determination.
Jeffrey Gerrish,
Deputy United States Trade Representative,
Office of the United States Trade
Representative.
[FR Doc. 2020–08189 Filed 4–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3290–F0–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Membership in the National Parks
Overflights Advisory Group
Federal Aviation
Administration, (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Solicitation of applications.
AGENCY:
The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and the National
Park Service (NPS) invite interested
persons to apply to fill three current and
three upcoming vacancies on the
National Parks Overflights Advisory
Group (NPOAG). This notice invites
interested persons to apply to fill the
openings. The current openings include
two representatives of commercial air
tour operators and one representative of
Native American tribes. The three
upcoming openings represent
environmental concerns.
DATES: Persons interested in these
membership openings will need to
apply by May 15, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Keith Lusk, Special Programs Staff,
Federal Aviation Administration,
Western-Pacific Region Headquarters,
777 S. Aviation Boulevard, Suite 150, El
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:19 Apr 16, 2020
Jkt 250001
Segundo, CA 90245, telephone: (424)
405–7017, email: Keith.Lusk@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Parks Air Tour
Management Act of 2000 (the Act) was
enacted on April 5, 2000, as Public Law
106–181, and subsequently amended in
the FAA Modernization and Reform Act
of 2012. The Act required the
establishment of the advisory group
within one year after its enactment. The
NPOAG was established in March 2001.
The advisory group is comprised of
representatives of general aviation,
commercial air tour operators,
environmental concerns, and Native
American tribes. The Administrator of
the FAA and the Director of NPS (or
their designees) serve as ex officio
members of the group. Representatives
of the Administrator and Director serve
alternating 1-year terms as chairman of
the advisory group.
In accordance with the Act, the
advisory group provides ‘‘advice,
information, and recommendations to
the Administrator and the Director—
(1) On the implementation of this title
[the Act] and the amendments made by
this title;
(2) On commonly accepted quiet
aircraft technology for use in
commercial air tour operations over a
national park or tribal lands, which will
receive preferential treatment in a given
air tour management plan;
(3) On other measures that might be
taken to accommodate the interests of
visitors to national parks; and
(4) At the request of the Administrator
and the Director, safety, environmental,
and other issues related to commercial
air tour operations over a national park
or tribal lands.’’
Membership
The current NPOAG is made up of
one member representing general
aviation, three members representing
the commercial air tour industry, four
members representing environmental
concerns, and two members
representing Native American tribes.
Members serve three year terms. Current
members of the NPOAG are as follows:
Melissa Rudinger representing general
aviation; Eric Lincoln representing
commercial air tour operators, with two
current openings; Robert Randall, Dick
Hingson, Les Blomberg, and John
Eastman representing environmental
interests; and Carl Slater representing
Native American tribes, with one
current opening. The three-year terms of
Mr. Hingson, Mr. Blomberg, and Mr.
Eastman expire on September 2, 2020.
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21499
Selections
In order to retain balance within the
NPOAG, the FAA and NPS are seeking
candidates interested in filling the two
vacant seats representing commercial air
tour operators and the vacant seat
representing Native American tribes as
well as the three upcoming vacancies
representing environmental concerns.
The FAA and NPS invite persons
interested in these openings on the
NPOAG to contact Mr. Keith Lusk
(contact information is written above in
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Requests to serve on the NPOAG must
be made to Mr. Lusk in writing and
postmarked or emailed on or before May
15, 2020. Any request to fill one of these
seats must describe the requestor’s
affiliation with commercial air tour
operators, environmental concerns, or
federally-recognized Native American
tribes, as appropriate. The request
should also explain what expertise the
requestor would bring to the NPOAG as
related to issues and concerns with
aircraft flights over national parks or
tribal lands. The term of service for
NPOAG members is 3 years. Members
may re-apply for another term.
On August 13, 2014, the Office of
Management and Budget issued revised
guidance regarding the prohibition
against appointing or not reappointing
federally registered lobbyists to serve on
advisory committees (79 Federal
Register 47482).
Therefore, before appointing an
applicant to serve on the NPOAG, the
FAA and NPS will require the
prospective candidate to certify that
they are not a federally registered
lobbyist.
Issued in El Segundo, CA on April 6, 2020.
Keith Lusk,
Program Manager, Special Programs
Staff,Western-Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. 2020–08176 Filed 4–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA–2020–0115]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a Renewed Approval of
Information Collection: Aviation
Research Grants Program Correction
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 75 (Friday, April 17, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21497-21499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08189]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
[Docket No. USTR-2020-0001]
Determination on the Exclusion of Bifacial Solar Panels From the
Safeguard Measure on Solar Products
AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 23, 2018, the President imposed a safeguard measure
on imports of certain solar products pursuant to a Section 201
investigation. On February 14, 2018, the U.S. Trade Representative
established procedures for interested persons to request product-
specific exclusions from application of the safeguard measure and to
comment on the submitted requests. Based on the requests and comments
received, the U.S. Trade Representative granted certain requests on
June 13, 2019, including a request to exclude from the safeguard
measure bifacial solar panels that consist only of bifacial solar
cells. On January 27, 2020, the U.S. Trade Representative established
procedures to consider whether to maintain, withdraw, or take some
other action with respect to the exclusion of bifacial solar panels
from the safeguard measure. Based on an evaluation of the comments
received, and responses to those comments, and in consultation with the
Secretaries of Commerce and Energy, the U.S. Trade Representative has
determined that the bifacial solar panel exclusion is undermining the
objectives of the safeguard measure. Accordingly, the U.S. Trade
Representative will request that the U.S. Court of International Trade
lift the order preliminarily enjoining the withdrawal from entering
into effect.
DATES: Withdrawal of the exclusion for bifacial solar panels from
application of the safeguard measure will apply to imported panels if
the Court lifts the preliminary injunction but in no case earlier than
May 18, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victor Mroczka, Office of WTO and
Multilateral Affairs, at [email protected] or (202) 395-9450, or
Dax Terrill, Office of General Counsel, at [email protected] or
(202) 395-4739.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On January 23, 2018, the President issued Proclamation 9693 (83 FR
3541) to impose a safeguard measure under section 201 of the Trade Act
of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2251) with respect to certain crystalline silicon
photovoltaic cells and other products containing these cells. The
Proclamation directed the U.S. Trade Representative to establish
procedures for interested persons to request product-specific
exclusions from the safeguard measure. It also authorized the U.S.
Trade Representative, after consultation with the Secretaries of
Commerce and Energy, to exclude products upon publication of a notice
in the Federal Register modifying the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS).
On February 14, 2018, the U.S. Trade Representative established
procedures to request a product exclusion and opened a public docket.
See 83 FR 6670 (February 2018 notice). Under the February 2018 notice,
requests for exclusion were to identify the particular product in terms
of its physical characteristics (such as dimensions, wattage, material
composition, or other distinguishing characteristics) that
differentiate it from other products subject to the safeguard measure.
The February 2018 notice provided that the U.S. Trade Representative
would not consider requests identifying the product at issue in terms
of the identity of the producer, importer, or ultimate consumer; the
country of origin; or trademarks or tradenames. The notice also
confirmed that the U.S. Trade Representative only would grant
exclusions that did not undermine the objectives of the safeguard
measure. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) received 48
product exclusion requests and 213 comments responding to the various
requests. The exclusion requests generally fell into seven categories,
one of which concerned bifacial solar panels.
On September 19, 2018, and June 13, 2019, the U.S. Trade
Representative granted certain product exclusion requests and modified
the HTSUS accordingly. See 83 FR 47393 and 84 FR 27684. The notice
published on June 13, 2019 (June 2019 notice) excluded from application
of the safeguard measure ``bifacial solar panels that absorb light and
generate electricity on each side of the panel and that consist of only
bifacial solar cells that absorb light and generate electricity on each
side of the cells.''
On October 9, 2019, the U.S. Trade Representative concluded, based
on an evaluation of newly available information and after consultation
with the Secretaries of Commerce and Energy, that maintaining the
exclusion would undermine the objectives of the safeguard measure.
Accordingly, the U.S. Trade Representative published a notice
withdrawing the exclusion of bifacial solar panels, effective as of
October 28, 2019. See 84 FR 54244.
On October 21, 2019, Invenergy Renewables LLC (Invenergy) filed a
complaint with the U.S. Court of International Trade alleging that USTR
failed to provide notice and comment required under the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq., before withdrawing the
exclusion of bifacial solar panels. Invenergy filed a motion for a
preliminary injunction to prevent the withdrawal from entering into
effect. The Court issued a preliminary injunction on December 5, 2019,
enjoining the U.S. Trade Representative from withdrawing the exclusion
on bifacial solar panels from the safeguard measure.
On January 27, 2020 (85 FR 4756), the U.S. Trade Representative
issued a notice (January 2020 notice) noting concerns that:
1. The bifacial solar panel exclusion will result in significant
increases in imports of bifacial solar panels and therefore will
undermine the objectives of the safeguard measure.
2. The precise definition of bifacial solar panels excluded from
the safeguard measure may require clarification.
3. The exclusion in the June 2019 notice is broader than the
category of products described in the exclusion requests submitted as
of March 16, 2018.
The U.S. Trade Representative established procedures and opened a
public docket to seek comment on whether to maintain the exclusion of
bifacial solar panels from the safeguard measure, withdraw the
exclusion, or take some other action with respect to this exclusion.
The January 2020 notice confirmed that the U.S. Trade Representative
would request the Court to lift the injunction if he determined that it
would be appropriate to
[[Page 21498]]
withdraw the bifacial exclusion or take some other action with respect
to this exclusion.
In the January 2020 notice, the U.S. Trade Representative
specifically requested information or views regarding the following,
with sufficient evidence to support a particular position:
Global and United States production and production
capacity for bifacial solar panels prior to and following the exclusion
of these products in the June 2019 notice, along with any information
on expected changes in production and production capacity for the
remaining term of the safeguard measure (i.e., until February 6, 2022).
Projections for the production and importation into the
United States of bifacial solar panels for the remaining term of the
safeguard measure.
Import data and entry documentation to establish the level
of bifacial solar panels imported into the United States prior to and
following the exclusion of these products in the June 2019 notice.
Projections of demand for bifacial solar panels by
companies building or planning to build solar facilities or otherwise
to install bifacial solar panels.
Contracts, purchase orders, or other agreements that
establish sales or other transactions, including those between
suppliers and customers, regarding bifacial solar panels that have been
or will be imported into the United States or will be produced in the
United States.
Production cost and price differential between the
manufacture and distribution of monofacial and bifacial solar panels.
Substitutability or competitiveness between monofacial and
bifacial solar panels in the United States.
Domestic production and production capacity of bifacial
solar cells or bifacial solar panels in the United States.
Whether the U.S. Trade Representative should modify the
exclusion to implement a tariff-rate quota (TRQ) on the importation of
bifacial solar panels that enter with no additional duty and, if so,
the level (e.g., in megawatts) of that TRQ.
The potential impact, if any, on the domestic workforce
and economy in general should the exclusion be withdrawn.
Any other information or data that interested persons
consider relevant to the U.S. Trade Representative's evaluation.
USTR received 15 comments regarding the bifacial exclusion and 49
subsequent comments responding to the initial comments. The
determination below is based on these comments.
The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issued a report in
March 2020 (March Report) in response to a request from the U.S. Trade
Representative for advice regarding potential modifications to the
safeguard measure, which provided certain information with regard to
the bifacial exclusion. In the March report, the ITC found that
bifacial panels are projected to gain a large share of total demand in
the coming years due to their power-generation advantages and relative
cost competitiveness with monofacial panels--particularly the price
advantage that the bifacial exclusion conferred upon them. See ITC
March Report, at ES-5. Accordingly, the ITC found that the bifacial
exclusion (a) likely will result in substantial increases in imports of
bifacial panels, and (b) that these products likely will compete with
domestically produced solar products in the U.S. market. See ITC March
Report, at I-4 and 5.
B. Determination Regarding the Bifacial Exclusion
Section 201(a) provides that, when the ITC finds that increased
imports are causing or threatening serious injury to a domestic
industry, the President ``shall take all appropriate and feasible
action within his power which the President determines will facilitate
efforts by the domestic industry to make a positive adjustment to
import competition and provide greater economic and social benefits
than costs.'' Proclamation 9693 provided that ``[i]f the USTR
determines, after consultation with the Secretaries of Commerce and
Energy, that a particular product should be excluded, the USTR is
authorized, upon publishing a notice of such determination in the
Federal Register, to modify the HTS provisions created by the Annex to
this proclamation to exclude such particular product from the safeguard
measure.'' The February 2018 notice provided that the U.S. Trade
Representative would ``grant only those exclusions that do not
undermine the objectives of the safeguard measures,'' which signifies
that an exclusion is not appropriate if it would interfere with the
domestic industry's ``positive adjustment to import competition.'' The
information and comments provided in response to the January 2020
notice indicate that the bifacial exclusion is doing this.
Specifically, the information and comments support the following
findings:
1. Global capacity to produce bifacial solar panels is likely to
increase significantly over the next three years.
2. As bifacial solar panel production currently is low in the
United States, and the vast majority of bifacial solar panel capacity
is foreign, allowing import of bifacial solar panels free of safeguard
tariffs disincentivizes U.S. producers from converting existing
monofacial production to bifacial production or opening new bifacial
production.
3. Imports of bifacial solar panels were rising even before the
bifacial exclusion and continued to increase after the exclusion.
4. Demand both globally and domestically for bifacial solar panels
is likely to increase significantly for at least the next three years.
5. The cost of producing bifacial solar panels is not more than 10
percent higher than the cost of producing monofacial panels.
6. Bifacial solar panels and monofacial solar panels are
substitutes from the perspective of utilities planning solar generating
facilities in locations where both are cost-competitive with
conventional forms of energy.
7. Bifacial solar panels are expected to offer a 5 to 10 percent
improvement in energy output over a same-size monofacial panel, and
removing the safeguard tariff will enable their sale for prices below
those of monofacial panels, which will depress prices for monofacial
panels.
8. The proposed TRQ for bifacial solar panels would allow
importation of massive quantities of bifacial solar panels and
therefore would duplicate the negative effects of the bifacial
exclusion.
9. Competition from low-priced imports prevented domestic producers
from selling significant quantities of solar panels in the utility
segment during the ITC's original investigation period, and low-priced
imports of bifacial solar panels due to the exclusion are likely to
have a similar effect under current market conditions.
Moreover, bifacial solar panels are an innovative technology that
represents a major area of growth for all producers of solar products.
Utilities are the largest and most rapidly growing purchasers of solar
panels in the United States. By disincentivizing domestic producers'
production of bifacial solar panels, interfering with their ability to
increase sales of monofacial and bifacial products into the utility
segment, and having a depressive effect on prices for monofacial solar
panels, the bifacial exclusion is hindering the domestic
[[Page 21499]]
industry's adjustment to import competition.
Therefore, the U.S. Trade Representative has determined that the
bifacial exclusion is undermining the objective of the safeguard
measure on solar products, does not meet the criteria for a legitimate
exclusion, and should be withdrawn. The U.S. Trade Representative has
found further and additionally that the findings in the ITC March
Report support the conclusion that the bifacial exclusion is
undermining the objectives of the safeguard measure.
C. Consultation With Other Government Agencies
As with the initial determination to exclude bifacial solar panels
from the safeguard measure, the U.S. Trade Representative consulted
with the Secretaries of Commerce and Energy regarding the comments,
responses, and supporting evidence received with respect to the January
2020 notice to reach this determination.
Jeffrey Gerrish,
Deputy United States Trade Representative, Office of the United States
Trade Representative.
[FR Doc. 2020-08189 Filed 4-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3290-F0-P