30450 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2022 / Notices 

8 Id. 

for more than four months. Commerce 

published the CVD Preliminary 

Determination on September 10, 2021.8

As such, the four-month period 

beginning on the date of the publication 

of the CVD Preliminary Determination 

ended on January 7, 2022. 

Therefore, in accordance with section 

703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to 

terminate the suspension of liquidation 

and to liquidate, without regard to 

countervailing duties, unliquidated 

entries of snow throwers from China 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption, on or after January 7, 

2022, the date on which the provisional 

measures expired, until and through the 

day preceding the date of publication of 

the ITC’s final injury determination in 

the Federal Register. Suspension of 

liquidation will resume on the date of 

publication of the ITC’s final 

determination in the Federal Register. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice constitutes the AD and 

CVD orders with respect to snow 

throwers from China pursuant to 

sections 706(a) and 736(a) of the Act. 

Interested parties can find a list of 

orders currently in effect at https://

enforcement.trade.gov/stats/ 

iastats1.html. 

These orders are published in 

accordance with sections 706(a) and 

736(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b). 

Dated: May 13, 2022. 

Lisa W. Wang, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix—Scope of the Orders 

The merchandise covered by these orders 

consists of gas-powered, walk-behind snow 

throwers (also known as snow blowers), 

which are snow moving machines that are 

powered by internal combustion engines and 

primarily pedestrian-controlled. The scope of 

these orders covers certain snow throwers 

(also known as snow blowers), whether selfpropelled or non-self-propelled, whether 

finished or unfinished, whether assembled or 

unassembled, and whether containing any 

additional features that provide for functions 

in addition to snow throwing. Subject 

merchandise also includes finished and 

unfinished snow throwers that are further 

processed in a third country or in the United 

States, including, but not limited to, 

assembly or any other processing that would 

not otherwise remove the merchandise from 

the scope of these orders if performed in the 

country of manufacture of the in-scope snow 

throwers. 

Walk-behind snow throwers subject to the 

scope of these orders are powered by internal 

combustion engines which are typically 

spark ignition, single or multiple cylinder, 

and air-cooled with power take off shafts. 

For the purposes of these orders, an 

unfinished and/or unassembled snow 

thrower means at a minimum, a subassembly 

comprised of an engine, auger housing (i.e., 

intake frame), and an auger (or ‘‘auger 

paddle’’) packaged or imported together. An 

intake frame is the portion of the snow 

thrower—typically of aluminum or steel that 

houses and protects an operator from a 

rotating auger and is the intake point for the 

snow. Importation of the subassembly 

whether or not accompanied by, or attached 

to, additional components including, but not 

limited to, handle(s), impeller(s), chute(s), 

track tread(s), or wheel(s) constitutes an 

unfinished snow thrower for purposes of 

these orders. The inclusion in a third country 

of any components other than the snow 

thrower sub-assembly does not remove the 

snow thrower from the scope. A snow 

thrower is within the scope of these orders 

regardless of the origin of its engine. 

Specifically excluded is merchandise 

covered by the scope of the antidumping and 

countervailing duty orders on certain vertical 

shaft engines between 225cc and 999cc, and 

parts thereof from the People’s Republic of 

China. See Certain Vertical Shaft Engines 

Between 225cc and 999cc, and Parts Thereof, 

from the People’s Republic of China: 

Amended Final Antidumping Duty 

Determination and Antidumping Duty Order, 

86 FR 12623 (March 4, 2021); and Certain 

Vertical Shaft Engines Between 225cc and 

999cc, and Parts Thereof from the People’s 

Republic of China: Countervailing Duty 

Order and Amended Final Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination, 86 FR 

12619 (March 4, 2021). 

Also specifically excluded is merchandise 

covered by the scope of the antidumping and 

countervailing duty orders on certain vertical 

shaft engines between 99cc and Up to 225cc, 

and parts thereof from the People’s Republic 

of China. See Certain Vertical Shaft Engines 

Between 99cc and Up to 225cc, and Parts 

Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Orders, 86 FR 023675 (May 4, 2021). 

The snow throwers subject to these orders 

are typically entered under Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

subheading 8430.20.0060. Certain parts of 

snow throwers subject to these orders may 

also enter under HTSUS 8431.49.9095. The 

HTSUS subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes only, and 

the written description of the merchandise 

under these orders is dispositive. 

[FR Doc. 2022–10789 Filed 5–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[Docket No. 220509–0112] 

RIN 0625–XC047 

Developing a Framework on 

Competitiveness of Digital Asset 

Technologies 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Administration, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; request for comment. 

SUMMARY: Executive Order of March 9, 

2022, ‘‘Ensuring Responsible 

Development of Digital Assets’’, outlines 

U.S. policy objectives with respect to 

digital assets. The Executive Order 

directs the Secretary of Commerce, in 

consultation with the Secretary of State, 

the Secretary of the Treasury, and the 

heads of any other relevant agencies, to 

establish a framework for enhancing 

U.S. economic competitiveness in, and 

leveraging of, digital asset technologies. 

Through this Request for Comment 

(RFC), the Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) is requesting input from the 

public that will inform the development 

of the framework. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before 5 p.m. Eastern 

Time on July 5, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be 

submitted in response to this document 

by comment through 

www.regulations.gov on Docket ITA– 

2022–0003 or by email to DigitalAssets@

trade.gov. 

Instructions: Commerce invites 

comments on the full range of issues 

presented in this Notice, including 

issues that are not specifically raised in 

questions in this Notice. Comments 

submitted by email should be machinereadable and should not be copyprotected. Commenters should include 

the name of the person or organization 

filing the comment, which will facilitate 

agency follow-up for clarifications as 

necessary, as well as a page number on 

each page of their submissions. All 

comments received are a part of the 

public record and will be posted on 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All personal identifying information (for 

example, name, address) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter may be 

publicly accessible. Comments should 

not include any business confidential or 

other sensitive or protected information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Please direct questions regarding this 

Notice to Vincent Tran, International 

Trade Specialist, telephone: 202–482– 

2967, email: DigitalAssets@trade.gov, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2022 / Notices 30451 

1As defined in the Executive Order, ‘‘digital 

assets’’ refers to ‘‘all [central bank digital currencies 

(CBDCs)], regardless of the technology used, and to 

other representations of value, financial assets and 

instruments, or claims that are used to make 

payments or investments, or to transmit or 

exchange funds or the equivalent thereof, that are 

issued or represented in digital form through the 

use of distributed ledger technology. For example, 

digital assets include cryptocurrencies, stablecoins, 

and CBDCs. Regardless of the label used, a digital 

asset may be, among other things, a security, a 

commodity, a derivative, or other financial product. 

Digital assets may be exchanged across digital asset 

trading platforms, including centralized and 

decentralized finance platforms, or through peer-topeer technologies.’’ 

2The Organization for Economic Cooperation and 

Development defines mining as follows: ‘‘For some 

blockchains, in order to add blocks to the ledger, 

transfers must go through a mining process. Mining 

is a way of adding transaction records, via blocks, 

onto a public ledger. Miners are nodes in the 

network that ensure the transactions in the block 

are valid. Specifically, they ensure that senders 

have not already used the funds they want to send 

to receivers. Once miners finish the verification, 

they have to ask the network for consent to add the 

Continued 

indicating ‘‘Notice and Request for 

Comment’’ in the subject line, or, if by 

mail, addressed to International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230. Please 

direct media inquiries to ITA’s Office of 

Public Affairs, publicaffairs@trade.gov 

or (202) 482–3809. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Executive Order 14067 of March 9, 

2022, ‘‘Ensuring Responsible 

Development of Digital Assets’’ 

(hereafter ‘‘Executive Order’’) (87 FR 

14143; March 14, 2022), outlines U.S. 

policy objectives with respect to digital 

assets,1 including but not limited to 

protecting consumers, investors, and 

businesses; mitigating systemic 

financial risk; mitigating the illicit 

finance and national security risks 

posed by misuse of digital assets; and 

supporting technological advancements 

that promote responsible development 

and use of digital assets. The Executive 

Order outlines the Federal government’s 

approach to the development of the U.S. 

digital assets sector. Section 2 of the 

Executive Order provides six principle 

policy objectives for digital assets: (a) 

Protection of consumers, investors, and 

businesses in the United States; (b) 

protection of United States and global 

financial stability and the mitigation of 

systemic risk; (c) mitigation of illicit 

finance and national security risks 

posed by misuse of digital assets; (d) 

reinforcement of U.S. leadership in the 

global financial system and in 

technological and economic 

competitiveness, including through the 

responsible development of payment 

innovations and digital assets; (e) 

promotion of access to safe and 

affordable financial services; and (f) 

support of technological advances that 

promote responsible development and 

use of digital assets. 

Section 8(a) provides the 

Administration’s policy on fostering 

international cooperation and United 

States competitiveness with respect to 

digital assets and financial innovation. 

Among other items, Section 8(a) notes 

that (i) technology-driven financial 

innovation is frequently cross-border 

and requires coordination among public 

authorities, particularly with respect to 

maintaining high regulatory standards; 

(ii) the United States government has 

been active in international fora on 

issues related to technology-driven 

financial innovation, including at the 

Financial Action Task Force (FATF); 

(iii) the U.S. presidency of the 2020 G7 

saw the establishment of the G7 Digital 

Payment Experts Group to discuss 

CBDCs, stablecoins, and other digital 

payment issues; (iv) the United States 

continues to support the G20 roadmap 

for addressing challenges and frictions 

with cross-border funds transfers and 

payments; and (v) the Biden-Harris 

Administration will elevate the 

importance of these topics and expand 

engagement with critical international 

partners, including through fora such as 

the G7, G20, FATF, and Financial 

Stability Board. United States 

engagement will focus on respect for 

core democratic values, protection of 

consumers, investors, and businesses, 

preservation of global financial system 

connectivity and platform 

interoperability, and maintenance of the 

safety and soundness of the global 

financial system and international 

monetary system. 

Section 8(b)(iii) of the Executive 

Order directs the Secretary of 

Commerce, in consultation with the 

Secretary of State, the Secretary of the 

Treasury, and the heads of any other 

relevant agencies, to (within 180 days of 

the date of the Executive Order) 

establish a framework for enhancing 

U.S. economic competitiveness in, and 

leveraging of, digital asset technologies. 

Through this RFC, Commerce is 

requesting input from the public that 

will inform Commerce’s work in 

developing the scope of the framework, 

in consultation with the Secretary of 

State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and 

the heads of other relevant agencies. 

II. Objective of this RFC 

This RFC offers an opportunity for all 

interested parties to provide relevant 

input and recommendations for 

consideration in Commerce’s 

development of the economic 

competitiveness framework as directed 

by Section 8(b)(iii) of the Executive 

Order. 

III. Request for Comments 

Commerce welcomes input on any 

matter that commenters believe is 

relevant to Commerce’s development of 

the framework for enhancing U.S. 

economic competitiveness in, and 

leveraging of, digital asset technologies, 

pursuant to Section 8(b)(iii) of the 

Executive Order. Commenters are 

encouraged to address any or all of the 

following questions, or to provide any 

other comments relevant to the 

development of the framework. When 

responding to one or more of the 

questions below, please note in your 

response the number(s) of the questions 

you are responding to. 

Commerce also seeks public comment 

on the following questions. 

Competitiveness 

(1) What are the features of U.S.-based 

digital asset businesses (e.g., 

administrators, operators, validators, 

and other key stakeholder roles in the 

function of digital assets as well as the 

exchanges, brokers, and custodians used 

to trade and store them) that currently 

underpin their competitiveness in a 

global market? Will these features 

support future competitiveness? 

(2) What obstacles do U.S. digital 

asset businesses face when competing 

globally? How have these obstacles 

changed over the past five years and are 

any anticipated to disappear? Are there 

clearly foreseeable new obstacles that 

they will face in the future? What steps 

could the U.S. government take to 

remove, minimize, or forestall any 

obstacles? 

(3) How does the current U.S. 

regulatory landscape affect U.S. digital 

asset businesses’ global 

competitiveness? Are there future 

regulatory shifts that could support 

greater global competitiveness of U.S. 

digital asset businesses? How does the 

U.S. regulatory landscape for digital 

assets compare to that in finance or 

other comparable sectors? 

(4) What are the primary challenges to 

U.S. technological leadership in the 

digital assets sector? 

(5) What impact, if any, does the 

global nature of the digital assets sector 

have on U.S. digital asset businesses’ 

ability to attract and retain talent and 

maintain leadership in development 

and operation of digital asset 

technologies within the United States? 

(6) What, if any, is the future role of 

digital assets mining 2 in the U.S. digital 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
30452 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 97 / Thursday, May 19, 2022 / Notices 

new block to the ledger. In order to do so, they have 

to follow the consensus mechanisms chosen for the 

platform.’’ OECD Blockchain Primer 

1See Lemon Juice From Brazil and South Africa: 

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 87 

FR 3768 (January 25, 2022). 

2See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Lemon Juice from Brazil 

and South Africa: Petitioner’s Request for 

Postponement of Preliminary Determination,’’ dated 

May 10, 2022. 

assets sector? Can digital assets be 

compatible with a low-carbon economy 

that emphasizes renewable energy? If so, 

how? In what ways can the U.S. 

government and U.S. companies drive 

competitive, sustainable (for the 

environment and energy consumption) 

development of digital assets? 

(7) What impact, if any, will global 

deployment of central bank digital 

currencies (CBDC) have on the U.S. 

digital assets sector? To what extent 

would the design of a U.S. CBDC (e.g., 

disintermediated or intermediated, 

interoperable with other countries’ 

CBDCs and other domestic and 

international financial services, etc.) 

impact the sector? 

(8) Should digital assets be given 

specific consideration in trade 

agreements? If so, to what extent? What 

types of provisions would be beneficial 

to the U.S. digital assets sector in the 

United States? Are there provisions that 

would be beneficial to U.S. businesses 

and consumers? 

(9) What other factors related to 

economic competitiveness should 

Commerce consider in the development 

of the framework? 

(10) Beyond enhanced economic 

competitiveness, how can the U.S. 

digital assets sector advance the other 

objectives outlined in the Executive 

Order? These other objectives include 

protection of consumers, investors, and 

business in the United States; protection 

of United States and global financial 

stability and the mitigation of systemic 

risk; and mitigation of illicit finance and 

national security risks posed by misuse 

of digital assets. 

(11) By what metrics should we 

measure the competitiveness of the U.S. 

digital assets sector in the global 

market? Are there existing 

measurements or data against these 

metrics? 

Comparisons to ‘Traditional’ Financial 

Services and Financial Inclusion 

Considerations 

(12) What factors and conditions, if 

any, that have driven and sustained the 

global leadership of U.S.-based legacy 

financial institutions will foster the 

same leadership for U.S. digital asset 

businesses? If there are no common 

factors, what factors and conditions will 

differentiate global competitiveness for 

U.S. digital asset businesses? 

(13) Can digital assets improve 

international payments (including trade 

and remittances), and improve on access 

to trade finance? If so, how? How do 

digital assets compare to other 

initiatives in payments such as the 

Federal Reserve’s FedNow? 

(14) According to the FDIC’s 2019 

‘‘How America Banks’’ survey, 

approximately 94.6 percent (124 

million) of U.S. households had at least 

one bank or credit union account in 

2019, while 5.4 percent (7.1 million) of 

households did not. Can digital assets 

play a role in increasing these and other 

underserved Americans’ access to safe, 

affordable, and reliable financial 

services, and if so, how? What role can 

the Federal government and the digital 

assets sector play to ensure that 

underserved Americans can benefit 

from the increased commercial 

availability of digital assets? 

Technological Development 

(15) To what extent do new standards 

for digital assets and their underlying 

technologies need to be maintained or 

developed, for instance those related to 

custody, identity, security, privacy, and 

interoperability? What existing 

standards are already relevant? How 

might existing standardization efforts be 

harmonized to support the responsible 

development of digital assets? 

(16) What new security concerns does 

increased adoption of digital assets 

raise? How can the U.S. government 

collaborate with U.S. digital asset 

businesses to protect consumers’ access 

to their assets, personal information, 

and other sensitive data? 

(17) To what extent will 

interoperability between different 

digital asset networks be important in 

the future? What risks does a lack of 

interoperability pose? And what steps, if 

any, should be taken to encourage 

interoperability? 

Diane Farrell, 

Deputy Under Secretary for International 

Trade. 

[FR Doc. 2022–10731 Filed 5–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–351–858, A–791–827] 

Certain Lemon Juice From Brazil and 

the Republic of South Africa: 

Postponement of Preliminary 

Determinations in the Less-Than-FairValue Investigations 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Applicable May 19, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit 

Astvatsatrian and Dakota Potts (Brazil), 

or Elizabeth Bremer and Zachary 

Shaykin (the Republic of South Africa 

(South Africa)), AD/CVD Operations, 

Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6412, 

(202) 482–0223, (202) 482–4987, or 

(202) 482–2638, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 19, 2022, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) 

initiated less-than-fair-value (LTFV) 

investigations of imports of certain 

lemon juice (lemon juice) from Brazil 

and South Africa.1 Currently, the 

preliminary determinations are due no 

later than June 8, 2022. 

Postponement of Preliminary 

Determinations 

Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires 

Commerce to issue the preliminary 

determination in an LTFV investigation 

within 140 days after the date on which 

Commerce initiated the investigation. 

However, section 733(c)(1)(A)(b)(1) of 

the Act permits Commerce to postpone 

the preliminary determination until no 

later than 190 days after the date on 

which Commerce initiated the 

investigation if: (A) The petitioner 

makes a timely request for a 

postponement; or (B) Commerce 

concludes that the parties concerned are 

cooperating, that the investigation is 

extraordinarily complicated, and that 

additional time is necessary to make a 

preliminary determination. Under 19 

CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must 

submit a request for postponement 25 

days or more before the scheduled date 

of the preliminary determination and 

must state the reasons for the request. 

Commerce will grant the request unless 

it finds compelling reasons to deny the 

request. 

On May 10, 2022, Ventura Coastal, 

LLC (the petitioner) submitted a timely 

request that Commerce postpone the 

preliminary determinations in these 

LTFV investigations.2 The petitioner 

stated that it requests postponement 

because Commerce has not yet received 

complete responses to the supplemental 

questionnaires it issued to respondents, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1