Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices 45095 

5See Large Power Transformers from the 

Republic of Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 

83 FR 24973 (May 31, 2018) (Preliminary Results) 

and the accompanying Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum. 

6HHI and HEES are collectively referred to as 

Hyundai. See Letter from Hyundai to Commerce, 

‘‘Large Power Transformers from Korea: Hyundai’s 

Case Brief,’’ dated July 6, 2018. 

7See Letter from the petitioner to Commerce, 

‘‘Large Power Transformers from the Republic of 

Korea: Petitioner’s Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated July 13, 

2018. 

8See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the 

non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant 

Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Final 

Results of Changed Circumstances Review 

Regarding Successor-In-Interest Analysis: Large 

Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea,’’ 

dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and 

Decision Memorandum). 

9See Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

retroactively to the effective date of the 

first entry by HEES.5

On July 6, 2018, Hyundai submitted 

comments regarding the Preliminary 

Results.6 On July 13, 2018, ABB 

submitted its rebuttal brief.7

Scope of the Order 

The scope of this Order covers large 

liquid dielectric power transformers 

having a top power handling capacity 

greater than or equal to 60,000 kilovolt 

amperes (60 megavolt amperes), 

whether assembled or unassembled, 

complete or incomplete. 

Incomplete LPTs are subassemblies 

consisting of the active part and any 

other parts attached to, imported with or 

invoiced with the active parts of LPTs. 

The ‘‘active part’’ of the transformer 

consists of one or more of the following 

when attached to or otherwise 

assembled with one another: The steel 

core or shell, the windings, electrical 

insulation between the windings, the 

mechanical frame for an LPT. 

The product definition encompasses 

all such LPTs regardless of name 

designation, including but not limited to 

step-up transformers, step-down 

transformers, autotransformers, 

interconnection transformers, voltage 

regulator transformers, rectifier 

transformers, and power rectifier 

transformers. 

The LPTs subject to this Order are 

currently classifiable under subheadings 

8504.23.0040, 8504.23.0080, and 

8504.90.9540 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

scope of this Order is dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

The issue raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this CCR is 

addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, which is hereby adopted 

by this notice.8 A list of the topics 

discussed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum is attached to this notice 

as an Appendix. The Issues and 

Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file electronically 

via Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Centralized Electronic Service System 

(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 

registered users at https://

access.trade.gov, and it is available to 

all parties in the Central Records Unit, 

Room B8024, of the main Department of 

Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed 

Issues and Decision Memorandum and 

the electronic version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum are identical in 

content. 

Final Results of Changed 

Circumstances Review 

Based on the record evidence and our 

analysis of the comments received, 

Commerce continues to find that 

applying HHI’s current cash deposit rate 

of 60.81 percent retroactively to the 

effective date of the first entry of HEES, 

HHI’s successor-in-interest, is 

warranted.9

Instructions to U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection 

As a result of this determination, 

Commerce will instruct CBP to collect 

estimated antidumping duties for all 

shipments of the subject merchandise 

produced and/or exported by HEES and 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the date of 

the first entry made by HEES at the 

60.81 percent rate established in the 

2014–2015 and 2015–2016 antidumping 

duty administrative reviews. This cash 

deposit requirement shall remain in 

effect until further notice. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice serves as a reminder to 

parties subject to administrative 

protective orders (APOs) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written 

notification of the destruction of APO 

materials or conversion to judicial 

protective order is hereby requested. 

Failure to comply with the regulations 

and terms of an APO is a sanctionable 

violation. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

final results notice in accordance with 

sections 751(b) and 777(i) of the Act, 

and 19 CFR 351.216, 351.221(b)(5), and 

351.221(c)(3). 

Dated: August 28, 2018. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Discussion of Interested Party Comments 

Comment: Whether Retroactive 

Application of a Cash Deposit Rate to a 

Successor-in-Interest Is Permitted by 

Law and Consistent With Commerce’s 

Practice 

V. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2018–19210 Filed 9–4–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–090] 

Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches 

in Diameter From the People’s 

Republic of China: Initiation of LessThan-Fair-Value Investigation 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable August 28, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Stolz or Jonathan Cornfield at (202) 

482–4474 or (202) 482–3855, 

respectively; AD/CVD Operations, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition 

On August 8, 2018, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) 

received an antidumping duty (AD) 

Petition concerning imports of certain 

steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in 

diameter (certain steel wheels) from the 

People’s Republic of China (China), 

filed in proper form on behalf of Dexstar 

Wheel, a division of Americana 

Development, Inc. (the petitioner), 

which is a domestic producer of certain 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
45096 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices 

1See the petitioner’s letter, ‘‘Petitions for the 

Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12–16.5 

Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated August 8, 2018 (the Petition). 

2See Commerce’s letters, both titled, ‘‘Petitions 

for the Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel 

Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the 

People’s Republic of China: Supplemental 

Questions,’’ both dated August 10, 2018 (AD 

Supplemental Questionnaire and General Issues 

Supplemental Questionnaire). 

3See the petitioner’s letters, ‘‘Petitioner’s 

Response to the Department of Commerce’s August 

10, 2018 Supplemental Questions, regarding the 

Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 

on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 

Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated August 14, 2018 (AD Supplement), 

and ‘‘Petitioner’s Response to the Department of 

Commerce’s August 10, 2018 General Issues 

Questionnaire Regarding the Petitions for the 

Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties on Imports of Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 

Inches in Diameter from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated August 15, 2018 (General Issues 

Supplement). 

4See memorandum to the file, ‘‘Phone Call with 

Counsel to the Petitioner,’’ dated August 17, 2018. 

5See the petitioner’s letter, ‘‘Petitioner’s 

Response to the Department of Commerce’s August 

17, 2018 Additional Questions Regarding the 

Petitions for the Imposition of antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel 

Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the 

People’s Republic of China,’’ dated August 20, 2018 

(Second General Issues and AD Supplement). 

6See memorandum to the file, ‘‘Phone Call with 

Counsel to the Petitioner: Valuation of Labor,’’ 

dated August 28, 2018. 

7See the ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petition’’ section, infra. 

8See General Issues Supplement, at 2–5 and 

Exhibit SGQ–2 (Revised Scope); see also Second 

General Issues and AD Supplement, at 1–2 and 

Exhibit SQR2–1 (Revised Scope). 

9See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 

Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 

10See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual 

information’’). 11See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 12See 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%20

Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf. 

steel wheels.1 The AD Petition was 

accompanied by a countervailing duty 

(CVD) Petition concerning imports of 

certain steel wheels from China. 

On August 10, 2018, Commerce 

requested supplemental information 

pertaining to certain aspects of the 

Petition in two separate supplemental 

questionnaires, one dealing with general 

issues with the Petition and the other 

with issues related to Volume II of the 

Petition (i.e., the AD allegation).2

The petitioner filed its responses to 

the supplemental questionnaires on 

August 14 and August 15, 2018.3 On 

August 17, 2018, we spoke with the 

counsel to the petitioner regarding the 

scope language and its August 14 and 

August 15, 2018, submissions, 

requesting further clarification to certain 

responses.4 On August 20, 2018, the 

petitioner responded to Commerce’s 

August 17 request for supplemental 

information, including further 

clarification of the scope language.5 On 

August 28, 2018, we again spoke with 

counsel to the petitioner, notifying 

counsel of a change to the index used 

to adjust the labor rate in the margin 

calculation.6

In accordance with section 732(b) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act), the petitioner alleges that imports 

of certain steel wheels from China 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 such imports 

are materially injuring, or threatening 

material injury to, the domestic industry 

producing certain steel wheels in the 

United States. Consistent with section 

732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is 

accompanied by information reasonably 

available to the petitioner supporting its 

allegation. 

Commerce finds that the petitioner 

filed the Petition on behalf of the 

domestic industry because the 

petitioner is an interested party as 

defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. 

Commerce also finds that the petitioner 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the initiation of 

the requested AD investigation.7

Period of Investigation 

Because China is a non-market 

economy (NME) country, pursuant to 19 

CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of 

investigation (POI) is January 1, 2018, 

through June 30, 2018. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The product covered by this 

investigation is certain steel wheels 12 

to 16.5 inches in diameter from China. 

For a full description of the scope of this 

investigation, see the Appendix to this 

notice. 

Scope Comments 

During our review of the Petition, 

Commerce contacted the petitioner 

regarding the proposed scope language 

to ensure that the scope language in the 

Petition is an accurate reflection of the 

products for which the domestic 

industry is seeking relief.8 As a result of 

the petitioner’s submissions, the scope 

of the Petition was modified to clarify 

the description of merchandise covered 

by the Petition. The description of the 

merchandise covered by this initiation, 

as described in the Appendix to this 

notice, reflects these clarifications. 

As discussed in the Preamble to 

Commerce’s regulations, we are setting 

aside a period for interested parties to 

raise issues regarding product coverage 

(scope).9 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,10 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 September 

17, 2018, which is 20 calendar days 

from the signature date of this notice. 

Any rebuttal comments, which may 

include factual information, must be 

filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on September 27, 

which is 10 calendar days from the 

initial comments deadline.11

Commerce requests that any factual 

information parties consider relevant to 

the scope of the investigation be 

submitted during this period. However, 

if a party subsequently finds that 

additional factual information 

pertaining to the scope of the 

investigation may be relevant, the party 

may contact Commerce and request 

permission to submit the additional 

information. All such submissions must 

be filed on the records of the concurrent 

AD and CVD investigations. 

Filing Requirements 

All submissions to Commerce must be 

filed electronically using Enforcement 

and Compliance’s Antidumping Duty 

and Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (ACCESS).12

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 

for AD Questionnaire 

Commerce is providing interested 

parties an opportunity to comment on 

the appropriate physical characteristics 

of certain steel wheels to be reported in 

response to Commerce’s AD 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices 45097 

13See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 

14See section 771(10) of the Act. 

15See 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)). 

16See Volume I of the Petition, at I–6 through I– 

8. 

17For a discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis as applied to this case and information 

regarding industry support, see memorandum, 

‘‘Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 

Checklist: Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in 

Diameter from the People’s Republic of China’’ 

(China AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II, 

(Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain 

Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the 

People’s Republic of China). This checklist is dated 

concurrently with this notice and on file 

electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents 

filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central 

Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department 

of Commerce building. 

18See Volume I of the Petition, at I–9, I–31 and 

Exhibit I–11. 

19See Volume I of the Petition, at I–9 and Exhibit 

I–2. 

20 Id. at I–2, I–9 and Exhibit I–1; see also General 

Issues Supplement, at SGQ–5 and Exhibit SGQ–5. 

21 Id. 

22 Id.; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act. 

23See China AD Initiation Checklist, at 

Attachment II. 

24 Id. 

questionnaire. This information will be 

used to identify the key physical 

characteristics of the merchandise under 

consideration in order to report the 

relevant factors of production 

accurately, as well as to develop 

appropriate product-comparison 

criteria. 

Interested parties may provide any 

information or comments that they feel 

are relevant to the development of an 

accurate list of physical characteristics. 

In order to consider the suggestions of 

interested parties in developing and 

issuing the AD questionnaire, all 

product characteristics comments must 

be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on September 

17, 2018, which is 20 calendar days 

from the signature date of this notice.13

Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 

5:00 p.m. ET on September 27, 2018. All 

comments and submissions to 

Commerce must be filed electronically 

using ACCESS, as explained above, on 

the record of the China LTFV 

investigation. 

Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petition 

Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires 

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act provides that a petition meets 

this requirement if the domestic 

producers or workers who support the 

petition account for: (i) At least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (ii) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the 

petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) 

of the Act provides that, if the petition 

does not establish support of domestic 

producers or workers accounting for 

more than 50 percent of the total 

production of the domestic like product, 

Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or 

rely on other information in order to 

determine if there is support for the 

petition, as required by subparagraph 

(A); or (ii) determine industry support 

using a statistically valid sampling 

method to poll the ‘‘industry.’’ 

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines 

the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a 

whole of a domestic like product. Thus, 

to determine whether a petition has the 

requisite industry support, the statute 

directs Commerce to look to producers 

and workers who produce the domestic 

like product. The International Trade 

Commission (ITC), which is responsible 

for determining whether ‘‘the domestic 

industry’’ has been injured, must also 

determine what constitutes a domestic 

like product in order to define the 

industry. While both Commerce and the 

ITC must apply the same statutory 

definition regarding the domestic like 

product,14 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.15

Section 771(10) of the Act defines the 

domestic like product as ‘‘a product 

which is like, or in the absence of like, 

most similar in characteristics and uses 

with, the article subject to an 

investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the 

reference point from which the 

domestic like product analysis begins is 

‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ 

(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to 

be investigated, which normally will be 

the scope as defined in the petition). 

With regard to the domestic like 

product, the petitioner does not offer a 

definition of the domestic like product 

distinct from the scope of the 

investigation.16 Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that certain 

steel wheels, as defined in the scope, 

constitute a single domestic like 

product, and we have analyzed industry 

support in terms of that domestic like 

product.17

In determining whether the petitioner 

has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act, we considered the industry 

support data contained in the Petition 

with reference to the domestic like 

product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the 

Investigation,’’ in the Appendix to this 

notice. To establish industry support, 

the petitioner provided its own 

production of the domestic like product 

in 2017.18 In addition, the petitioner 

provided a letter of support from 

American Wheel Corporation, stating 

that the company supports the Petition 

and providing its own production of the 

domestic like product in 2017.19 The 

petitioner identifies itself and American 

Wheel Corporation as the only 

companies constituting the U.S. certain 

steel wheels industry and states that 

there are no other known producers of 

certain steel wheels in the United 

States; therefore, the Petition is 

supported by 100 percent of the U.S. 

industry.20

Our review of the data provided in the 

Petition, the General Issues Supplement, 

and other information readily available 

to Commerce indicates that the 

petitioner has established industry 

support for the Petition.21 First, the 

Petition established support from 

domestic producers (or workers) 

accounting for more than 50 percent of 

the total production of the domestic like 

product and, as such, Commerce is not 

required to take further action in order 

to evaluate industry support (e.g., 

polling).22 Second, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the Petition 

account for at least 25 percent of the 

total production of the domestic like 

product.23 Finally, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the Petition 

account for more than 50 percent of the 

production of the domestic like product 

produced by that portion of the industry 

expressing support for, or opposition to, 

the Petition.24 Accordingly, Commerce 

determines that the Petition was filed on 

behalf of the domestic industry within 

the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the 

Act. 

Commerce finds that the petitioner 

filed the Petition on behalf of the 

domestic industry because it is an 

interested party as defined in section 

771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the AD 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
45098 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices 

25 Id. 26See Volume I of the Petition, at I–19 through 

I–21 and Exhibit I–8. 27 Id. at I–15 through I–42 and Exhibits I–2, I–6, 

I–8, I–10, I–11, I–14 through I–16; see also General 

Issues Supplement, at SGQ–5, SGQ–6 and Exhibit 

SGQ–6. 28See China AD Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment III (Analysis of Allegations and 

Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 

Covering Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in 

Diameter from the People’s Republic of China). 29See China AD Initiation Checklist. 30 Id. 

31See Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain 

Aluminum Foil from the People’s Republic of 

China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of 

Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value and Postponement of 

Final Determination, 82 FR 50858, 50861 

(November 2, 2017) (citing Memorandum to Gary 

Taverman, ‘‘China’s Status as a Non-Market 

Economy,’’ dated October 26, 2017), unchanged in 

Certain Aluminum Foil from the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, 83 FR 9282 (March 5, 2018). 

32See China AD Initiation Checklist. 

33See AD Supplement at 3–4 and Exhibit S–II– 

4(B). 

34See Volume II of the Petition at 10 and Exhibit 

II–9; see also AD Supplement at Exhibits S–II–2, S– 

II–3(B), and S–II–7; and Second General Issues and 

AD Supplement at Exhibits SQR2–2 through SQR2– 

6. 

35See China AD Initiation Checklist. 

36See Volume II of the Petition at 13 and Exhibit 

II–5(A). 

37 Id. 

38 Id. at Exhibit II–9; see also AD Supplement at 

Exhibits II–2, II–3(B) and S–II–7; see also Second 

General Issues and AD Supplement at Exhibits 

SQR2–2 through SQR2–6. 

39See Volume II of the Petition at Exhibit II–9. 

40See Second General Issues and AD Supplement 

at Exhibit SQR2–7; see also China AD Initiation 

Checklist at Attachment V. 

41See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I–6; see 

also General Issues Supplement, at SGQ–1 and 

Exhibit SGQ–1. 

investigation that it is requesting that 

Commerce initiate.25

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 less than normal 

value (NV). In addition, the petitioner 

alleges that subject imports exceed the 

negligibility threshold provided for 

under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.26

The petitioner contends that the 

industry’s injured condition is 

illustrated by a significant and 

increasing volume of subject imports; 

reduced market share; underselling and 

price depression or suppression; lost 

sales and lost revenues; decline in 

production, U.S. shipments, and 

capacity utilization; decline in 

production-related workers and hours 

worked; decline in capital expenditures; 

and negative impact on financial 

performance.27 We have assessed the 

allegations and supporting evidence 

regarding material injury, threat of 

material injury, and causation, and we 

have determined that these allegations 

are properly supported by adequate 

evidence, and meet the statutory 

requirements for initiation.28

Allegations of Sales at LTFV 

The following is a description of the 

allegations of sales at LTFV upon which 

Commerce based its decision to initiate 

an AD investigation of imports of 

certain steel wheels from China. The 

sources of data for the deductions and 

adjustments relating to U.S. price and 

NV are discussed in greater detail in the 

China AD Initiation Checklist. 

Export Price 

The petitioner based U.S. export price 

(EP) on price lists for certain steel 

wheels offered for export to the United 

States by a Chinese producer and 

exporter of certain steel wheels.29 The 

petitioner made deductions from U.S. 

price for movement expenses, consistent 

with the terms of sale.30

Normal Value 

Commerce considers China to be an 

NME country.31 In accordance with 

section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any 

determination that a foreign country is 

an NME country shall remain in effect 

until revoked by Commerce. Therefore, 

we continue to treat China as an NME 

country for purposes of the initiation of 

this investigation. Accordingly, NV in 

China is appropriately based on factors 

of production (FOPs) valued in a 

surrogate market economy country, in 

accordance with section 773(c) of the 

Act.32

The petitioner claims that Romania is 

an appropriate surrogate country for 

China because it is a market economy 

country that is at a level of economic 

development comparable to that of 

China and it is a significant producer of 

comparable merchandise.33 The 

petitioner provided publicly available 

information from Romania to value all 

FOPs.34 Therefore, based on the 

information provided by the petitioner, 

we determine that it is appropriate to 

use Romania as the primary surrogate 

country for initiation purposes.35

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 

Based on its assertion that 

information regarding the FOPs and 

volume of inputs consumed by Chinese 

producers/exporters of certain steel 

wheels was not reasonably available to 

the petitioner, the petitioner used its 

own consumption rates to estimate the 

Chinese manufacturers’ FOPs.36 The 

petitioner stated that consumption rates 

for the Chinese FOPs are similar to 

those experienced by the petitioner, and 

as such, the petitioner used its own 

inputs and consumption rates to 

estimate the Chinese manufacturers’ 

FOPs.37 In addition, the petitioner 

valued the estimated FOPs using 

surrogate values from Romania,38 and 

used the average POI exchange rate to 

convert surrogate values expressed in 

euros to U.S. dollars.39

Fair Value Comparisons 

Based on the data provided by the 

petitioner, there is reason to believe that 

imports of certain steel wheels from 

China 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 

certain steel wheels from China are 

30.48–44.35 percent.40

Initiation of LTFV Investigation 

Based upon the examination of the 

Petition, we find that the Petition meets 

the requirements of section 732 of the 

Act. Therefore, we are initiating an AD 

investigation to determine whether 

imports of certain steel wheels from 

China 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 determination no later than 

140 days after the date of this initiation. 

Respondent Selection 

The petitioner named 36 producers/ 

exporters as accounting for the majority 

of exports of certain steel wheels to the 

United States from China.41 In 

accordance with our standard practice 

for respondent selection in AD cases 

involving NME countries, we intend to 

issue quantity and value (Q&V) 

questionnaires to producers/exporters of 

merchandise subject to this 

investigation. In the event Commerce 

determines that it cannot individually 

examine each company, where 

appropriate, Commerce intends to select 

mandatory respondents based on the 

responses received to its Q&V 

questionnaire. Commerce will request 

Q&V information from known exporters 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices 45099 

42See 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 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf 

(Policy Bulletin 05.1). 

43Although in past investigations this deadline 

was 60 days, consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), 

which states that ‘‘the Secretary may request any 

person to submit factual information at any time 

during a proceeding,’’ this deadline is now 30 days. 

44See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added). 

45See section 733(a) of the Act. 

46 Id. 

47See 19 CFR 351.301(b). 

48See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 

49See section 782(b) of the Act. 

and producers identified with complete 

contact information in the Petition. In 

addition, Commerce will post the Q&V 

questionnaires along with filing 

instructions on Enforcement and 

Compliance’s website at http://

www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. 

Producers/exporters of certain steel 

wheels from China that do not receive 

Q&V questionnaires by mail may still 

submit a response to the Q&V 

questionnaire and can obtain a copy of 

the Q&V questionnaire from 

Enforcement & Compliance’s website. 

The Q&V questionnaire response must 

be submitted by the relevant Chinese 

exporters/producers no later than 5:00 

p.m. ET on September 11, 2018, which 

is two weeks from the signature date of 

this notice. All Q&V responses must be 

filed electronically via ACCESS. 

Separate Rates 

In order to obtain separate-rate status 

in an NME investigation, exporters and 

producers must submit a separate-rate 

application.42 The specific requirements 

for submitting a separate-rate 

application in this investigation are 

outlined in detail in the application 

itself, which is available on Commerce’s 

website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/ 

nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separaterate application will be due 30 days 

after publication of this initiation 

notice.43 Exporters and producers who 

submit a separate-rate application and 

have been selected as mandatory 

respondents will be eligible for 

consideration for separate-rate status 

only if they respond to all parts of 

Commerce’s AD questionnaire as 

mandatory respondents. Commerce 

requires that companies from China 

submit a response to both the Q&V 

questionnaire and the separate-rate 

application by the respective deadlines 

in order to receive consideration for 

separate-rate status. Companies not 

filing a timely Q&V questionnaire 

response will not receive separate-rate 

consideration. 

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}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.44

Distribution of Copies of the Petition 

In accordance with section 

732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.202(f), copies of the public version 

of the Petition have been provided to 

the government of China via ACCESS. 

To the extent practicable, we will 

attempt to provide a copy of the public 

version of the Petition to each exporter 

named in the Petition, as provided 

under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We will notify the ITC of our 

initiation, as required by section 732(d) 

of the Act. 

Preliminary Determination by the ITC 

The ITC will preliminarily determine, 

within 45 days after the date on which 

the Petition was filed, whether there is 

a reasonable indication that imports of 

certain steel wheels from China are 

materially injuring or threatening 

material injury to a U.S. industry.45 A 

negative ITC determination will result 

in the investigation being terminated.46

Otherwise, the investigation will 

proceed according to statutory and 

regulatory time limits. 

Submission of Factual Information 

Factual information is defined in 19 

CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence 

submitted in response to questionnaires; 

(ii) evidence submitted in support of 

allegations; (iii) publicly available 

information to value factors under 19 

CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 

adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 

351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on 

the record by Commerce; and (v) 

evidence other than factual information 

described in (i)–(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) 

requires any party, when submitting 

factual information, to specify under 

which subsection of 19 CFR 

351.102(b)(21) the information is being 

submitted 47 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.48 Time 

limits for the submission of factual 

information are addressed in 19 CFR 

351.301, which provides specific time 

limits based on the type of factual 

information being submitted. Interested 

parties should review the regulations 

prior to submitting factual information 

in this investigation. 

Extensions of Time Limits 

Parties may request an extension of 

time limits before the expiration of a 

time limit established under 19 CFR 

351.301, or as otherwise specified by the 

Secretary. In general, an extension 

request will be considered untimely if it 

is filed after the expiration of the time 

limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. 

For submissions that are due from 

multiple parties simultaneously, an 

extension request will be considered 

untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET 

on the due date. Under certain 

circumstances, we may elect to specify 

a different time limit by which 

extension requests will be considered 

untimely for submissions which are due 

from multiple parties simultaneously. In 

such a case, we will inform parties in 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 

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013- 

09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 

submitting factual information in this 

investigation. 

Certification Requirements 

Any party submitting factual 

information in an AD or CVD 

proceeding must certify to the accuracy 

and completeness of that information.49

Parties must use the certification 

formats provided in 19 CFR 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
45100 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Notices 

50See also Certification of Factual Information to 

Import Administration During Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 

17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked 

questions regarding the Final Rule are available at 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_

info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 

1See the petitioner’s letter, ‘‘Petitions for the 

Imposition of Antidumping Duties and 

Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel 

Wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in Diameter from the 

People’s Republic of China,’’ dated August 8, 2018 

(the Petition). 

2See Commerce’s letters, ‘‘Petition for the 

Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 

Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter 

from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental 

Questions’’ (CVD Deficiency Questionnaire), and 

‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel 

Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the 

People’s Republic of China: Supplemental 

Questions’’ (General Issues Deficiency 

Questionnaire), each dated August 10, 2018. 

3See the petitioner’s letters, ‘‘Certain Steel 

Wheels 12 To 16.5 inches in Diameter from the 

People’s Republic of China (C–570–091): 

Petitioners’ Response to Commerce’s August 10, 

2018 Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding the 

Countervailing Duty Petition’’ (CVD Supplement) 

and ‘‘Petitioners’ Response to Commerce’s August 

10, 2018 General Issues Questionnaire Regarding 

the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel 

Wheels from the People’s Republic of China,’’ 

(General Issues Supplement), each dated August 15, 

2018. 

4See memorandum, ‘‘Phone Call with Counsel to 

the Petitioner,’’ dated August 17, 2018. 

5See the petitioner’s letter, ‘‘Petitioner’s 

Response to the Department of Commerce’s August 

17, 2018 Additional Questions Regarding the 

Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel 

Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in Diameter from the 

People’s Republic of China,’’ dated August 20, 2018 

(Second Scope and AD Supplement). 

351.303(g).50 Commerce intends to 

reject factual submissions if the 

submitting party does not comply with 

the applicable certification 

requirements. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

Interested parties must submit 

applications for disclosure under APO 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On 

January 22, 2008, Commerce published 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Proceedings: Documents Submission 

Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 

3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing 

to participate in this investigation 

should ensure that they meet the 

requirements of these procedures (e.g., 

the filing of letters of appearance as 

discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) 

of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c). 

Dated: August 28, 2018. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Appendix 

Scope of the Investigation 

The scope of this investigation is certain 

on-the-road steel wheels, discs, and rims for 

tubeless tires with a nominal wheel diameter 

of 12 inches to 16.5 inches, regardless of 

width. Certain on-the-road steel wheels with 

a nominal wheel diameter of 12 inches to 

16.5 inches within the scope are generally for 

road and highway trailers and other towable 

equipment, including, inter alia, utility 

trailers, cargo trailers, horse trailers, boat 

trailers, recreational trailers, and towable 

mobile homes. The standard widths of 

certain on-the-road steel wheels are 4 inches, 

4.5 inches, 5 inches, 5.5 inches, 6 inches, and 

6.5 inches, but all certain on-the-road steel 

wheels, regardless of width, are covered by 

the scope. 

The scope includes rims and discs for 

certain on-the-road steel wheels, whether 

imported as an assembly, unassembled, or 

separately. The scope includes certain onthe-road steel wheels regardless of steel 

composition, whether cladded or not 

cladded, whether finished or not finished, 

and whether coated or uncoated. The scope 

also includes certain on-the-road steel wheels 

with discs in either a ‘‘hub-piloted’’ or ‘‘studpiloted’’ mounting configuration, though the 

stud-piloted configuration is most common 

in the size range covered. 

All on-the-road wheels sold in the United 

States must meet Standard 110 or 120 of the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration’s (NHTSA) Federal Motor 

Vehicle Safety Standards, which requires a 

rim marking, such as the ‘‘DOT’’ symbol, 

indicating compliance with applicable motor 

vehicle standards. See 49 CFR 571.110 and 

571.120. The scope includes certain on-theroad steel wheels imported with or without 

NHTSA’s required markings. 

Certain on-the-road steel wheels imported 

as an assembly with a tire mounted on the 

wheel and/or with a valve stem or rims 

imported as an assembly with a tire mounted 

on the rim and/or with a valve stem are 

included in the scope of this investigation. 

However, if the steel wheels or rims are 

imported as an assembly with a tire mounted 

on the wheel or rim and/or with a valve stem 

attached, the tire and/or valve stem is not 

covered by the scope. 

Excluded from this scope are the following: 

(1) Steel wheels for use with tube-type 

tires; such tires use multi piece rims, which 

are two-piece and three-piece assemblies and 

require the use of an inner tube; 

(2) aluminum wheels; 

(3) certain on-the-road steel wheels that are 

coated entirely with chrome; and 

(4) steel wheels that do not meet Standard 

110 or 120 of the NHTSA’s requirements 

other than the rim marking requirements 

found in 49 CFR 571.110S4.4.2 and 

571.120S5.2. 

Certain on-the-road steel wheels subject to 

this investigation are properly classifiable 

under the following category of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS): 8716.90.5035 which covers 

the exact product covered by the scope 

whether entered as an assembled wheel or in 

components. Certain on-the-road steel wheels 

entered with a tire mounted on them may be 

entered under HTSUS 8716.90.5059 (Trailers 

and semi-trailers; other vehicles, not 

mechanically propelled, parts, wheels, other, 

wheels with other tires) (a category that will 

be broader than what is covered by the 

scope). While the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

subject merchandise is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2018–19206 Filed 9–4–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–091] 

Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches 

in Diameter From the People’s 

Republic of China: Initiation of 

Countervailing Duty Investigation 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable August 28, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Keith Haynes at (202) 482–5139 or 

Emily Halle at (202) 482–0176, AD/CVD 

Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition 

On August 8, 2018, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) 

received a countervailing duty (CVD) 

Petition concerning imports of certain 

steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in 

diameter (certain steel wheels) from the 

People’s Republic of China (China), 

filed in proper form on behalf of Dexstar 

Wheel, a division of Americana 

Development, Inc. (the petitioner), 

which is a domestic producer of certain 

steel wheels.1 The CVD Petition was 

accompanied by an antidumping duty 

(AD) Petition concerning imports of 

certain steel wheels from China. 

On August 10, 2018, Commerce 

requested supplemental information 

pertaining to certain aspects of the 

Petition in two separate supplemental 

questionnaires, one dealing with general 

issues with the Petition and the other 

with issues related to Volume III of the 

Petition (i.e., the CVD allegation).2

The petitioner filed its responses to 

the supplemental questionnaires on 

August 15, 2018.3 On August 17, 2018, 

we spoke with the petitioner regarding 

the scope language submitted in its 

August 15, 2018, submission.4 On 

August 20, 2018, the petitioner filed an 

amendment to the scope, further 

clarifying the scope language.5


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES