[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 72 (Wednesday, April 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20197-20200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08673]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-912]


Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2012-2013

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

SUMMARY: On October 10, 2014, the Department of Commerce 
(``Department'') published the preliminary results of the 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain new 
pneumatic off-the-road tires (``OTR tires'') from the People's Republic 
of China (``PRC'').\1\ The period of review (``POR'') is September 1, 
2012, through August 31, 2013. This review covers the following 
exporters of subject merchandise: Mandatory respondents, Double Coin 
Holdings Ltd. (``Double Coin'') and Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd./Guizhou Tyre 
Import and Export Co., Ltd. (collectively, ``GTC''), and non-examined 
respondents Zhongce Rubber Group Company Limited (``Zhongce''), Weihai 
Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd. (``Zhongwei''), and Trelleborg Wheel System 
(Xingtai) China, Co. Ltd. (``Trelleborg''). We continue to find that 
GTC made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value; that 
Zhongce and Zhongwei are eligible for separate rates; that Double Coin 
failed to demonstrate eligibility for separate rate status and thus has 
been included in the PRC-wide entity, and that Trelleborg had no 
shipments during the POR. The final dumping margins for this review are 
listed in the ``Final Results'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the 
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR 61291 (October 10, 2014) 
(``Preliminary Results'').

DATES: Effective: April 15, 2015.

[[Page 20198]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Medley or Brendan Quinn, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4987 and (202) 482-5848, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On October 10, 2014, the Department published its Preliminary 
Results of the antidumping duty administrative review of OTR tires from 
the PRC and invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary 
results. We granted parties an extension of time to submit case and 
rebuttal briefs.\2\ On December 11, 2014, we received case briefs from 
Petitioners,\3\ GTC, and Double Coin. On December 19, 2014, we received 
a rebuttal brief from Trelleborg. On December 23, 2014, we received 
rebuttal briefs from Petitioners, GTC, Double Coin, and Zhongce. On 
December 30, 2014, the Department extended the deadline for the final 
results until April 8, 2015.\4\ In accordance with timely requests from 
parties, on February 25, 2015, the Department held a public hearing.\5\ 
We conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the ``Act'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Letters from the Department titled ``2012-2013 
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's Republic of China: 
Extension of Time for Case Briefs and Rebuttal Briefs,'' dated 
October 31, 2014, and ``2012-2013 Administrative Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires 
from the People's Republic of China: Second Extension of Time for 
Case Briefs and Rebuttal Briefs,'' dated December 5, 2014. See also 
``2012-2013 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's Republic 
of China: Extension of Time for Rebuttal Briefs,'' dated December 
15, 2014.
    \3\ Titan Tire Corporation and the United Steel, Paper and 
Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and 
Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC (collectively, 
``Petitioners'').
    \4\ See Memorandum titled ``Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road 
Tires from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' dated 
December 30, 2014.
    \5\ See Hearing Transcript, filed onto the record by Lisa Dennis 
Court Reporting on March 25, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by this order includes new pneumatic tires 
designed for off-the-road and off-highway use, subject to certain 
exceptions. The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') 
subheadings: 4011.20.10.25, 4011.20.10.35, 4011.20.50.30, 
4011.20.50.50, 4011.61.00.00, 4011.62.00.00, 4011.63.00.00, 
4011.69.00.00, 4011.92.00.00, 4011.93.40.00, 4011.93.80.00, 
4011.94.40.00, and 4011.94.80.00. The HTSUS subheadings are provided 
for convenience and customs purposes only; the written product 
description of the scope of the order is dispositive.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For a complete description of the scope of the order, see 
Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. 
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 
Compliance, titled, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's Republic of China; 
2012-2013,'' dated concurrently with this notice (``Issues and 
Decision Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties 
in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues that 
parties raised and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum follows as an appendix to this notice. 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'').\7\ ACCESS is 
available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and it is 
available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the 
main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version 
of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the 
Internet at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/. The signed Issues and 
Decision Memorandum and electronic version of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and Compliance changed the 
name of Enforcement and Compliance's AD and CVD Centralized 
Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS'') to AD and CVD Centralized 
Electronic Service System (``ACCESS''). The Web site location was 
changed from http://iaaccess.trade.gov to http://access.trade.gov. 
The Final Rule changing the references to the Regulations can be 
found at 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination of No Shipments

    As noted in the Preliminary Results, we received a no-shipment 
certification from Trelleborg.\8\ Consistent with its practice, the 
Department asked U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to 
conduct a query on potential shipments made by Trelleborg during the 
POR; CBP did not provide any evidence that contradicts Trelleborg's 
claim of no shipments.\9\ Based on Trelleborg's certification, our 
analysis of CBP information, and analysis of interested parties' 
comments, we determine that Trelleborg did not have any reviewable 
transactions during the POR.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 61292.
    \9\ See CBP Message Number 3352302, dated December 18, 2013.
    \10\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination of Affiliation and Collapsing

    We continue to find that Double Coin Group Jiangsu Tyre Co., Ltd., 
Double Coin Group Shanghai Donghai Tyre Co., Ltd., and Double Coin 
Holdings, Ltd. are affiliated pursuant to section 771(33)(E) of the Act 
and should be collapsed together and treated as a single company 
(collectively, ``Double Coin''), pursuant to the criteria laid out in 
19 CFR 351.401(f).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 61292. No party commented 
on this issue in their case briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Separate Rates

    In the Preliminary Results, we determined that GTC, Zhongce, and 
Zhongwei are eligible for separate-rate status; we also determined that 
Double Coin was part of the PRC-wide Entity.\12\ We made no changes to 
these determinations for the final results.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id., and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 
the ``Separate Rates'' section.
    \13\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 1 and 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate

    Normally, the Department's practice is to look for guidance from 
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, to assign to separate rate companies 
that were not individually examined a rate equal to the average of the 
rates calculated for the individually examined respondents, excluding 
any rates that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on adverse facts 
available.\14\ In this case, we found one mandatory respondent, Double 
Coin, to be part of the PRC-wide entity. The other mandatory 
respondent, GTC, is receiving a separate rate calculated from its own 
sales and production data. To determine a rate for the unselected 
separate rate companies, we find it

[[Page 20199]]

appropriate to use the margin calculated for GTC, which was also found 
to be separate from the PRC-wide entity with respect to its export 
activities, and which rate is not zero or de minimis nor based entirely 
on facts available. Therefore, we are assigning GTC's calculated margin 
as the rate assigned to non-examined entities which demonstrated their 
eligibility for a separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical 
Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's 
Republic of China, 71 FR 77373, 77377 (December 26, 2006), unchanged 
in Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial 
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain 
Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China, 72 FR 
19690 (April 19, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRC-Wide Entity

    Double Coin, one of the companies that the Department selected as a 
mandatory respondent in this administrative review, failed to 
demonstrate absence of de facto government control over export 
activities due to the fact that its controlling shareholder is wholly-
owned by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration 
Commission of the State Council and the significant level of control 
this majority shareholder wields over the respondent's Board of 
Directors.\15\ As a result, we determine that Double Coin is part of 
the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 61292-93 and accompanying 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum at the ``Separate Rates'' section. 
See also Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because Double Coin provided the Department with its verified sales 
and production data, we are able to calculate a margin for an 
unspecified portion of a single PRC-wide entity, but cannot do so for 
the remaining unspecified portion of the entity. As the Department must 
calculate a single margin for the PRC-wide government controlled entity 
and there is insufficient information on the record with respect to the 
composition of the PRC-wide entity, as facts available pursuant to 
section 776(a)(1) of the Act, we calculated a simple average of the 
previously assigned PRC-wide rate (210.48 percent) \16\ and Double 
Coin's calculated margin (0.14 percent) as the rate applicable to the 
PRC-wide entity. Accordingly, the Department revised the PRC-wide 
entity rate to 105.31 percent for these final results.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the 
People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales 
at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of 
Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485, 40489 (July 15, 2008).
    \17\ See Memorandum to the File titled ``2012-2013 
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's Republic of China: 
Analysis of the Final Results Margin Calculation for Double Coin,'' 
dated April 8, 2015 (``Double Coin Final Analysis Memorandum''). See 
also Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on an analysis of the comments received, we made certain 
calculation programming changes and revisions to the valuation of 
certain factors of production. For further details on the changes we 
made for these final results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 
See also Memorandum to the File titled ``Final Results of the 2012-2013 
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain New 
Pneumatic off-The-Road Tires from the People's Republic of China: 
Surrogate Value Memorandum,'' dated April 8, 2015; Memorandum to the 
File titled ``2012-2013 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 
Order on Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's 
Republic of China: Analysis of the Final Results Margin Calculation for 
Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd.,'' dated April 8, 2015; and Double Coin Final 
Analysis Memorandum.

Final Results

    As a result of this administrative review, we determine that the 
following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period 
September 1, 2012, through August 31, 2013:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The PRC-Wide Entity includes Double Coin.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Weighted
                                                              average
                        Exporter                              dumping
                                                              margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd./Guizhou Tyre Import and Export              11.34
 Co., Ltd...............................................
Zhongce Rubber Group Company Limited....................           11.34
Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd.........................           11.34
PRC-Wide Entity \18\....................................          105.31
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review pursuant to 
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b).\19\ The 
Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days 
after the date of publication of these final results of review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of the Weighted-
Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping 
Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8103 (February 14, 2012) 
(``NME Antidumping Proceedings'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For customers or importers of GTC for which we do not have entered 
value, we calculated importer- (or customer-) specific antidumping duty 
assessment amounts based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping 
duties calculated for the examined sales of subject merchandise to the 
total sales quantity of those same sales.\20\ For customers or 
importers of GTC for which we received entered-value information, we 
have calculated importer- (or customer-) specific antidumping duty 
assessment rates based on importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem 
rates.\21\ For the non-examined separate rate companies, we will 
instruct CBP to liquidate all appropriate entries at 11.34 percent. For 
the PRC-wide entity, including Double Coin, we will instruct CBP to 
liquidate all appropriate entries at 105.31 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department recently announced a refinement to its assessment 
practice in non-market economy (``NME'') cases.\22\ Pursuant to this 
refinement in practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. 
sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during 
this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries 
at the NME-wide rate. In addition, if the Department determines that an 
exporter under review had no shipments of subject merchandise, any 
suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number (i.e., 
at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the NME-wide rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the 
final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash 
deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin 
identified in the ``Final Results'' section; (2) for previously 
investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that are not under 
review in this segment of the proceeding but that received a separate 
rate in a previous segment, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 
the exporter-specific rate (or exporter-producer chain rate) published 
for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) for all 
PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be 
entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide 
rate of 105.24 percent; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject 
merchandise which have not received

[[Page 20200]]

their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to 
the PRC exporter(s) that supplied that non-PRC exporter. The cash 
deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
further notice.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties 
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. 
Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's 
presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping and/or countervailing 
duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping 
duties.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under the APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/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 violation which is subject to sanction.

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the 
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
    We are issuing and publishing the final results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 8, 2015.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Issues and Decision Memorandum

Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
Discussion of the Issues
    Comment 1: Whether To Include Double Coin in the PRC-Wide Entity 
and Adjust the Entity Rate
    Comment 2: Whether To Assign a Margin to Trelleborg
    Comment 3: Whether To Assign a Margin to Zhongce
    Comment 4: Whether To Adjust U.S Prices for Un-refunded Value-
Added Tax (``VAT'')
    Comment 5: Use of Adverse Facts Available in Calculating Double 
Coin's Margin
    Comment 6: Use of PT Gajah Tunggal's Financial Statement for the 
Surrogate Financial Ratio Calculation
    Comment 7: Surrogate Value (``SV'') for Coal
    Comment 8: Valuation of Labor
    Comment 9: Valuation of Domestic Truck Freight
    Comment 10: Valuation of Electricity
    Comment 11: Container Weight Used in Ocean Freight and Brokerage 
and Handling Surrogate Value Calculations
    Comment 12: Whether To Exclude Certain Ocean Freight Charges 
When Calculating a Surrogate Value for Ocean Freight
    Comment 13: Whether To Deflate the Surrogate Value for GTC's 
Warehouse Costs
    Comment 14: Whether To Calculate Region-Specific U.S. Delivery 
Charges for GTC's U.S. Inland Freight Surrogate Value
    Comment 15: Surrogate Values for GTC's Tackifier Inputs
    Comment 16: Freight Distance Applied to GTC's Inputs
    Comment 17: Calculation of Double Coin's Truck Freight and 
Distance
    Comment 18: Whether Truck Freight Costs are Over-Counted
    Comment 19: Surrogate Value for Double Coin's Polyester Cord 
Inputs
    Comment 20: Surrogate Values for Double Coin's Cinder and 
Calcium Oxide By-products
    Comment 21: Calculation of Double Coin's Warranty Costs
    Comment 22: Conversion of the Truck Freight Surrogate Value 
Applied to Double Coin's Coal Consumption
    Comment 23: Calculation of Credit Costs for Double Coin's Drop-
Shipped Sales
    Comment 24: Calculation of Inventory Carrying Costs for Double 
Coin's Warehouse Sales
    Comment 25: Differential Price Calculation
     Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2015-08673 Filed 4-14-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P