[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 150 (Monday, August 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37992-37998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16655]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-122-867, A-560-833, A-580-902, A-552-825]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of
Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-
Fair-Value Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable July 29, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney at (202) 482-4475
(Canada); Brittany Bauer (202) 482-3860 (Indonesia); Rebecca Janz at
(202) 482-2972 (Republic of Korea (Korea)); and Edythe Artman at (202)
482-3931 (Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam)); AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On July 9, 2019, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of utility
scale wind towers (wind towers) from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and
Vietnam, filed in proper form on behalf of the Wind Tower Trade
Coalition (the petitioner).\1\ The Petitions were accompanied by
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of wind towers
from Canada, Indonesia, and Vietnam.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam,'' dated July 9, 2019 (the Petitions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37993]]
During the period July 12 through 22, 2019, Commerce requested
supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions
in separate supplemental questionnaires.\2\ The petitioner filed
responses to the supplemental questionnaires between July 16 and 24,
2019.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Utility Scale
Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia, and the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Supplemental Questions,'' dated July 12, 2019; and,
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada: Supplemental Questions,''
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia: Supplemental Questions,''
``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental
Questions,'' and ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties
on Imports of Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Supplemental Questions,'' all dated July 15, 2019; see
also Memoranda, ``Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' dated
July 15, 2019; ``Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' dated
July 18, 2019; and, ``Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,''
dated July 22, 2019.
\3\ See Petitioner's Letters, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Responses to First Supplemental Questions on Common
Issues and Injury Volume I of the Petition,'' dated July 16, 2019
(General Issues Supplement); ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada: Responses to First Supplemental Questions on Canada Volume
II of the Petition,'' ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia:
Responses to First Supplemental Questions on Indonesia Volume III of
the Petition,'' and Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Responses to First Supplemental Questions on
Vietnam Volume V of the Petition,'' each dated July 18, 2019;
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea: Responses to
First Supplemental Questions on Korea Volume IV of the Petition,''
dated July 19, 2019; ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada,
Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Responses to Second Supplemental Questions on Common Issues
and Injury Volume I of the Petition,'' dated July 19, 2019 (Scope
Supplement); ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada: Responses to
Second Supplemental Questions on Canada Volume II of the Petition,''
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia: Responses to Second
Supplemental Questions on Indonesia Volume III of the Petition,''
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Republic of Korea: Responses to
Second Supplemental Questions on Volume IV of the Petition,'' and
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Responses to Second Supplemental Questions on Vietnam Volume V of
the Petition,'' each dated July 24, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of wind towers
from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam are being, or are likely to
be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) within the
meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that imports of such products
are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the
domestic wind tower industry in the United States. Consistent with
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by
information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its
allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of
the domestic industry, because the petitioner is an interested party,
as defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act. Commerce also finds that
the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support necessary for
the initiation of the requested AD investigations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petitions'' section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Periods of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on July 9, 2019, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the Canada,
Indonesia, and Korea investigations is July 1, 2018 through June 30,
2019. Because Vietnam is a non-market economy (NME) country, pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI for the Vietnam investigation is
January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019.
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is wind towers from
Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam. For a full description of the
scope of these investigations, see the Appendix to this notice.
Scope Comments
During our review of the Petitions, we contacted the petitioner
regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the
Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the
domestic industry is seeking relief.\5\ As a result, the scope of the
Petitions was modified to clarify the description of the merchandise
covered by the Petitions. The description of the merchandise covered by
these investigations, as described in the Appendix to this notice,
reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See General Issues Supplement; see also Memorandum, ``Phone
Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' dated July 18, 2019; and
Scope Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding
product coverage (i.e., scope).\6\ Commerce will consider all comments
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determination. If scope comments include factual information,\7\ all
such factual information should be limited to public information. To
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that
all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time
(ET) on August 19, 2019, which is 20 calendar days from the signature
date of this notice.\8\ Any rebuttal comments, which may include
factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 29, 2019,
which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
\8\ Because the deadline falls on a Sunday (i.e., August 18,
2019), the deadline becomes the next business day (i.e., August 19,
2019).
\9\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce requests that any factual information the parties consider
relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this
time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional
factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may
be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to
submit the additional information. All such comments must also be filed
on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\10\ An electronically
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the
time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the electronic
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form)
with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable
deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046
(November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing
requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on help using
ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a
handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Product Characteristics
Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment
on the appropriate physical characteristics
[[Page 37994]]
of wind towers to be reported in response to Commerce's AD
questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key
physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to develop
appropriate product-comparison criteria, as well as to report the
relevant factors of production (FOPs) accurately.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product
characteristics, and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it
is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product
comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers
to describe wind towers, it may be that only a select few product
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching
products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics
last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 19,
2019, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this
notice.\11\ Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on
August 29, 2019. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of each
of the AD investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b). Because the deadline falls on a
Sunday (i.e., August 18, 2019), the deadline becomes the next
business day (i.e., August 19, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i)
Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling
method to poll the ``industry.''
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the Act directs
Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like
product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible
for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has been injured,
must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order
to define the industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the
same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,\12\ they
do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct
authority. In addition, Commerce's determination is subject to
limitations of time and information. Although this may result in
different definitions of the like product, such differences do not
render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\13\ See, e.g., USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1,
8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688
F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope
of the Petitions.\14\ Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that wind towers, as
defined in the scope, constitute a single domestic like product, and we
have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like
product.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17-18 and Exhibits I-9
and I-14; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1-2 and Exhibit I-
Supp-2; and Scope Supplement, at 1 and Exhibit I-Supp2-1.
\15\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility
Scale Wind Towers from Canada (Canada AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Utility Scale Wind Towers
from Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam (Attachment II); Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia
(Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers
from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD Initiation Checklist), at
Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam (Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These
checklists are dated concurrently with this notice and are on file
electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is
also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main
Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 26, 2019, we received industry support challenges from
Marmen Energy Co. (Marmen) and Vestas Towers America, Inc. (Vestas),
U.S. producers of wind towers.\16\ On July 29, 2019, the petitioner
responded to the standing challenges from Marmen and Vestas.\17\ Based
on information provided in the Petitions and in the letters from Marmen
and Vestas, the share of total U.S. production of the domestic like
product in calendar year 2018 represented by the supporters of the
Petitions did not account for more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product. Therefore, in accordance with
section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act, we relied on other information to
determine industry support.\18\ In determining whether the petitioner
has standing under sections 732(c)(4)(A) and 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act,
we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions and
other information on the record with
[[Page 37995]]
reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ``Scope of the
Investigations,'' in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry
support, the petitioner provided its own 2018 production of the
domestic like product, as well as the 2018 production by the supporters
of the Petitions. Other information on the record establishes the total
2018 production of other U.S. producers of the domestic like product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Marmen's Letter, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Standing Challenge,'' dated July 26, 2019 (Marmen
Letter); see also Vestas' Letter, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, South Korea, and Vietnam: Vestas Towers America,
Inc.'s Comments on Industry Support,'' dated July 26, 2019 (Vestas
Letter).
\17\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Response to Standing Challenge and Comments on Industry
Support,'' dated July 29, 2019 (Petitioner Letter).
\18\ For further discussion, see Canada AD Initiation Checklist,
at Attachment II; see also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at
Attachment II; Korea AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and
Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act states that (i) Commerce ``shall
disregard the position of domestic producers who oppose the petition if
such producers are related to foreign producers, as defined in section
771(4)(B)(ii), unless such domestic producers demonstrate that their
interests as domestic producers would be adversely affected by the
imposition of an antidumping duty order;'' and (ii) Commerce ``may
disregard the position of domestic producers of a domestic like product
who are importers of the subject merchandise.'' In addition, 19 CFR
351.203(e)(4) states that the position of a domestic producer that
opposes the petition (i) will be disregarded if such producer is
related to a foreign producer or to a foreign exporter under section
771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act, unless such domestic producer demonstrates to
the Secretary's satisfaction that its interests as a domestic producer
would be adversely affected by the imposition of an antidumping order;
and (ii) may be disregarded if the producer is an importer of the
subject merchandise or is related to such an importer under section
771(4)(B)(ii) of the Act. Certain producers of the domestic like
product that opposed the Petitions are related to foreign producers
and/or imported subject merchandise from the subject countries. We have
analyzed the information provided by the petitioner and information
provided in the submissions from Marmen and Vestas. Based on our
analysis, we have determined that it is appropriate to disregard the
opposition to the Petitions from certain producer(s) pursuant to
section 732(c)(4)(B) of the Act. When the opposition to the Petitions
is disregarded, the industry support requirements of section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act are satisfied.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see
also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our analysis and review of the information on the record,
we have determined that the petitioner has established industry support
for the Petitions.\20\ The information on the record demonstrates that
the domestic producers of wind towers who support the Petitions account
for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like
product and, once certain opposition is disregarded, account for more
than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced
by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition
to, the Petitions.\21\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the
Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the
meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see
also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
\21\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see
also Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition, the petitioner alleges that
subject imports from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam each exceed
the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of
the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 31-32 and Exhibit I-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports;
reduced market share; lost sales and lost revenues; underselling and
price depression or suppression; negative impact on the domestic
industry's production, shipments, capacity utilization, and employment;
and declining financial performance.\23\ We have assessed the
allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat
of material injury, causation, cumulation, as well as negligibility,
and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by
adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for
initiation.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Id. at 15-16, 20-48 and Exhibits I-4, I-6, I-8, I-9, I-14,
I-17 and I-19 through I-28.
\24\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III,
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia, the
Republic of Korea, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Attachment
III); see also Indonesia AD Checklist, at Attachment III; Korea AD
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations of Sales at LTFV
The following is a description of the allegation of sales at LTFV
upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate AD investigations of
imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam. The
sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S.
price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the AD
Initiation Checklist for each country.
Export Price
For Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam, the petitioner based
export price (EP) on sales of wind towers produced in, and exported
from, those countries and sold in the United States, valued using the
average unit values (AUVs) of publicly available import data.\25\ For
Canada, the petitioner also calculated EP based upon a sales offer from
a Canadian producer.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; Korea AD Initiation Checklist; and Vietnam AD Initiation
Checklist.
\26\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value
For Canada, Indonesia, and Korea, the petitioner was unable to
obtain information relating to the prices charged for wind towers in
Canada, Indonesia, Korea, or any third country market.\27\ Because home
market and third country prices were not reasonably available, the
petitioner calculated NV based on constructed value (CV). For further
discussion of CV, see the section ``Normal Value Based on Constructed
Value.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklists.
\28\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for
this investigation, Commerce will request information necessary to
calculate the CV and cost of production (COP) to determine whether
there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the
foreign like product have been made at prices that represent less
than the COP of the product. Commerce no longer requires a COP
allegation to conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to Vietnam, Commerce considers Vietnam to be an NME
country.\29\ In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the
presumption of NME status remains in effect until revoked by Commerce.
Therefore, we continue to treat Vietnam
[[Page 37996]]
as an NME for purposes of the initiation of this investigation.
Accordingly, NV in Vietnam is appropriately based on FOPs and surrogate
financial ratios from a surrogate market economy country, in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2016, 82 FR 26050 (June
6, 2017), unchanged in Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative
Review; 2014-2016, 82 FR 45266 (September 28, 2017).
\30\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner claims that India is an appropriate surrogate
country for Vietnam, because it is a market economy country that is at
a level of economic development comparable to that of Vietnam, it is a
significant producer of comparable merchandise, and public information
from India is available to value all material input factors.\31\ Based
on the information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is
appropriate to use India as a surrogate country for initiation
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Volume V of the Petition at 10-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled
date of the preliminary determination.
Factors of Production
Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the
Vietnamese producers/exporters is not available, the petitioner relied
on the production experience of a U.S. wind tower producer as an
estimate of Vietnamese manufacturers' FOPs.\32\ The petitioner valued
the estimated FOPs using surrogate values from India and used the
average POI exchange rate to convert the data to U.S. dollars.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
\33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
As noted above, the petitioner was unable to obtain information
relating to the prices charged for wind towers in Canada, Indonesia,
and Korea, or any third country market; accordingly, the petitioner
based NV on CV.\34\ Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists
of the cost of manufacturing (COM), selling, general, and
administrative (SG&A) expenses, financial expenses, packing expenses,
and profit. For Canada, Indonesia, and Korea, the petitioner calculated
the COM based on the input factors of production and usage rates from a
U.S. producer of wind towers. The input factors of production were
valued using publicly available data on costs specific to Canada,
Indonesia, and Korea during the proposed POI.\35\ Specifically, the
prices for raw materials, reclaimed steel scrap, and packing inputs
were valued using publicly available import data for Canada, Indonesia,
and Korea.\36\ Labor and energy costs were valued using publicly
available sources for Canada, Indonesia, and Korea.\37\ The petitioner
calculated factory overhead, SG&A, and profit for Canada, Indonesia,
and Korea based on the average ratios found in the experience of a
producer of comparable merchandise from each of these countries.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\35\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\36\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\37\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\38\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist; Indonesia AD Initiation
Checklist; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the Petitions there is reason to
believe that imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and
Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at
LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772
and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for wind towers for
each of the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1)
Canada--53.63 and 61.59 percent; \39\ (2) Indonesia--26.00 and 47.19
percent; \40\ (3) Korea--280.69 and 331.26 percent; \41\ and (4)
Vietnam--39.97 to 65.96 percent.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
\40\ See Indonesia AD Initiation Checklist.
\41\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
\42\ See Vietnam AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of LTFV Investigations
Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental
responses, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section
732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to
determine whether imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea,
and Vietnam are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States
at LTFV. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary
determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Respondent Selection
The petitioner named four companies in Canada,\43\ two companies in
Indonesia,\44\ and three companies in Korea \45\ as producers/exporters
of wind towers. Following standard practice in AD investigations
involving market economy countries, in the event Commerce determines
that the number of companies is large and it cannot individually
examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, where
appropriate, Commerce intends to select respondents in Canada and Korea
based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports
under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) numbers listed with the scope in the Appendix.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-16.
\44\ Id.
\45\ Id.
\46\ See, e.g., Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigations, 83 FR 58223, 58227 (November 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 22, 2019, Commerce released CBP data on imports of wind
towers from Canada, Korea, and Vietnam under administrative protective
order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO
and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP
data must do so within three business days of the publication date of
the notice of initiation of these investigations.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Memorandum, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada:
Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,''
dated July 22, 2019; Memorandum, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
the Republic of Korea: Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and
Border Protection,'' dated July 22, 2019; and Memorandum, ``Utility
Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: U.S.
Customs and Border Protection Data,'' dated July 22, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CBP data identified only one company as a producer/exporter of
wind towers in Indonesia: PT Kenertec Power System (Kenertec).\48\
Kenertec was also identified in the petition as a producer/exporter of
wind towers from Indonesia.\49\ Accordingly, because there are no other
producers/exporters identified in the CBP data, Commerce intends to
examine the sole producer/exporter identified in the CBP data. Parties
wishing to comment on the selection of Kenertec as a mandatory
respondent must do so within three days of the publication of this
notice. Any such comments must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. ET
on the due date and must be filed electronically via ACCESS. Commerce
will not accept
[[Page 37997]]
rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See Memorandum, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia:
Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data,'' dated July 22,
2019.
\49\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner stated that CS Wind Vietnam Co. (CS Wind) is the
only Vietnamese wind tower producer that is not currently subject to
the existing AD order \50\ on wind towers from Vietnam and, thus, the
only company for which the Petition was filed with respect to
Vietnam.\51\ As such, we will not conduct respondent selection based on
quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires as the Vietnam AD investigation
only applies to CS Wind.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 78 FR 11150 (February 15, 2013).
\51\ See Volume I of the Petitions at 1 n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation,
exporters and producers normally must submit a separate-rate
application.\52\ However, applicants which have been selected as
mandatory respondents prior to the deadline for submission of separate
rate applications are not required to file a separate rate application.
Because CS Wind is the only company for which the Petition was filed
with respect to Vietnam, CS Wind will be eligible for consideration for
separate-rate status only if it responds to all parts of Commerce's AD
questionnaire as a mandatory respondent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at
http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin
05.1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Combination Rates
Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents
that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The
Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:
{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now
assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those producers
that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note,
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period
of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory
respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as
well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-
average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is
referred to as the application of ``combination rates'' because such
rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply
only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of
investigation.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been
provided to the governments of Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam
via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a
copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in
the Petitions as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea,
and/or Vietnam are materially injuring, or threatening material injury
to, a U.S. industry.\54\ A negative ITC determination for any country
will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that
country.\55\ Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\55\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission of Factual Information
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i)
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual
information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information
is being submitted \56\ and, if the information is submitted to rebut,
clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to
provide an explanation identifying the information already on the
record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or
correct.\57\ Time limits for the submission of factual information are
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based
on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties
should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information
in these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\57\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particular Market Situation Allegation
Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended
the Act by adding the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for
purposes of CV under section 773(e) of the Act.\58\ Section 773(e) of
the Act states that ``if a particular market situation exists such that
the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind
does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary
course of trade, the administering authority may use another
calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation
methodology.'' When an interested party submits a PMS allegation
pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a
submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds
that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify
its dumping calculations appropriately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a
deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual
information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act,
Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual
information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should
an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new
factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do
so no later than 20 days after submission of a respondent's initial
section D questionnaire response.
Extensions of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date.
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for
submissions which are due
[[Page 37998]]
from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform
parties in a letter or memorandum of the deadline (including a
specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be
considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate,
stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant
untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties
should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790
(September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information
in these investigations.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\59\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).\60\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\60\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce
published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents
Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008).
Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure
that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing
of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2)
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: July 29, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by these investigations consists of
certain wind towers, whether or not tapered, and sections thereof.
Certain wind towers support the nacelle and rotor blades in a wind
turbine with a minimum rated electrical power generation capacity in
excess of 100 kilowatts and with a minimum height of 50 meters
measured from the base of the tower to the bottom of the nacelle
(i.e., where the top of the tower and nacelle are joined) when fully
assembled.
A wind tower section consists of, at a minimum, multiple steel
plates rolled into cylindrical or conical shapes and welded together
(or otherwise attached) to form a steel shell, regardless of
coating, end-finish, painting, treatment, or method of manufacture,
and with or without flanges, doors, or internal or external
components (e.g., flooring/decking, ladders, lifts, electrical buss
boxes, electrical cabling, conduit, cable harness for nacelle
generator, interior lighting, tool and storage lockers) attached to
the wind tower section. Several wind tower sections are normally
required to form a completed wind tower.
Wind towers and sections thereof are included within the scope
whether or not they are joined with nonsubject merchandise, such as
nacelles or rotor blades, and whether or not they have internal or
external components attached to the subject merchandise.
Specifically excluded from the scope are nacelles and rotor
blades, regardless of whether they are attached to the wind tower.
Also excluded are any internal or external components which are not
attached to the wind towers or sections thereof, unless those
components are shipped with the tower sections.
Further, excluded from the scope of the antidumping duty
investigations are any products covered by the existing antidumping
duty order on utility scale wind towers from the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam. See Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 78 FR 11150 (February
15, 2013).
Merchandise covered by these investigations is currently
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) under subheading 7308.20.0020 or 8502.31.0000. Wind towers
of iron or steel are classified under HTSUS 7308.20.0020 when
imported separately as a tower or tower section(s). Wind towers may
be classified under HTSUS 8502.31.0000 when imported as combination
goods with a wind turbine (i.e., accompanying nacelles and/or rotor
blades). While the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the
investigations is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2019-16655 Filed 8-2-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P