[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38216-38221]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16887]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-122-868, C-560-834, C-552-826]
Utility Scale Wind Towers From Canada, Indonesia, and the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable July 29, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tyler Weinhold at (202) 482-1121
(Canada); Alex Wood at (202) 482-1959 (Indonesia); Julie Geiger at
(202) 482-2057 (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 countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of
utility scale wind towers (wind towers) from Canada, Indonesia, and
Vietnam, filed in proper form on behalf of the Wind Tower Trade
Coalition (the petitioner).\1\ The Petitions were accompanied by
antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of wind towers from
Canada, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the period July 12 through 18, 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 19,
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'' (General Issues Supplemental
Questionnaire), ``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing
Duties on Imports of Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada:
Supplemental Questions,'' ``Petition for the Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Indonesia: Supplemental Questions,'' and ``Petition for the
Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of Utility Scale Wind
Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Supplemental
Questions,'' dated July 12, 2019; see also Memorandum, ``Phone Call
with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' dated July 18, 2019 (July 18, 2019
Memorandum).
\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 Supplemental); ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada: Response to First Supplemental Questions on Canada CVD
Volume III {sic{time} of the Petition,'' (Canada CVD Supplement
Response), ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from {Indonesia{time} :
Response to First Supplemental Questions on Indonesia CVD Volume VII
of the Petition,'' (Indonesia CVD Supplement Response), and
``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:
Response to First Supplemental Questions on Vietnam CVD Volume VIII
of the Petition'' (Vietnam CVD Supplement Response), each dated July
17, 2019; and, ``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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Governments of
Canada, Indonesia, and Vietnam (GOC, GOI, and GOV, respectively) are
providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701
and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of wind towers in Canada, Indonesia
and Vietnam, 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 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating
CVD investigations, 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 CVD investigations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petition'' section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 38217]]
Period of Investigations
Because the Petitions were filed on July 9, 2019, the period of
investigation is January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018.
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is wind towers from
Canada, Indonesia, 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 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; and July 18, 2019 Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 such 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 parties consider
relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this
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 submissions must 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, which went into effect on 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consultations
Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce
notified representatives of the GOC, GOI, and GOV of the receipt of the
Petitions and provided them the opportunity for consultations with
respect to the Petitions.\11\ Consultations were held with the GOC and
GOV on July 19, 2019,\12\ and with the GOI on July 22, 2019.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Indonesia: Invitation for Consultations to Discuss the
Countervailing Duty Petition,'' and ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Invitation for Consultations to
Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,'' each dated July 10,
2019; and ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada: Invitation for
Consultations to Discuss the Countervailing Duty Petition,'' dated
July 12, 2019.
\12\ See Memoranda, ``Consultations with Government Officials
from the Government of Canada on the Countervailing Duty Petition
Regarding Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada,'' dated July 24,
2019, and ``Consultations with Government Officials from the
Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on the
Countervailing Duty Petition Regarding Utility Scale Wind Towers
from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,'' dated July 22, 2019.
\13\ See Memorandum, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada,
Indonesia, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Government of
Indonesia Consultations,'' dated July 22, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i)
Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling
method to poll the ``industry.''
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers, as a whole, of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like
product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the
ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product,\14\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination
is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\15\ See 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 (Federal Circuit
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
[[Page 38218]]
``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.\16\ 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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 17-18 and Exhibits I-9
and I-14.
\17\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to this case and information regarding industry support, see
Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility
Scale Wind Towers from Canada (Canada CVD 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); see also Countervailing Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Indonesia (Indonesia CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II;
and Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Utility
Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Vietnam
CVD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are
dated concurrently with this notice and on file electronically via
ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in
the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of
Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\18\ On July 29, 2019, the petitioner
responded to the standing challenges from Marmen and Vestas.\19\ 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 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act, we relied on other information to
determine industry support.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See letter from Marmen, ``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 letter from Vestas, ``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).
\19\ See letter from the petitioner, ``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).
\20\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether the petitioner has standing under sections
702(c)(4)(A) and 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act, we considered the industry
support data contained in the Petitions and other information on the
record with 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.
Section 702(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 702(c)(4)(B) of the Act. When the opposition to the Petitions
is disregarded, the industry support requirements of section
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act are satisfied.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\22\ 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.\23\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the
Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the
meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Canada CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; see
also Indonesia CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and
Vietnam CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
\23\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury Test
Because Canada, Indonesia, and Vietnam are ``Subsidies Agreement
Countries'' within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section
701(a)(2) of the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the
ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from
Canada, Indonesia, and/or Vietnam materially injure, or threaten
material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry
producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioner
alleges that subject imports from Canada, Indonesia, and Vietnam exceed
the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of
the Act.\24\ In CVD petitions, section 771(24)(B) of the Act provides
that imports of subject merchandise from developing and least developed
countries must exceed the negligibility threshold of four percent. The
petitioner also demonstrates that
[[Page 38219]]
subject imports from Indonesia, which has been designated as a least
developed country under section 771(36)(B) of the Act, exceed the
negligibility threshold of four percent.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 31-32 and Exhibit I-17.
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\26\ 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.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 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.
\27\ See Canada CVD 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 CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment
III; and Vietnam CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of CVD Investigations
Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental
responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 702 of
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating CVD investigations to determine
whether imports of wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, and Vietnam
benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOC, GOI, and
GOV, respectively. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary
determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.
Canada
Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 23 of the 30
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision
whether to initiate on each program, see Canada CVD Initiation
Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for this
investigation is available on ACCESS.
Indonesia
Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on seven of the
eight alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our
decision whether to initiate on each program, see Indonesia CVD
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for
this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Vietnam
Based on our review of the petition, we find that there is
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation, in whole or
part, on each of the alleged programs. For a full discussion of the
basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see Vietnam CVD
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for
this investigation is available on ACCESS.
Respondent Selection
The petitioner named four companies in Canada, two companies in
Indonesia, and three companies in Vietnam as producers/exporters of
wind towers.\28\ Commerce intends to follow its standard practice in
CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy rates in
these investigations. 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 mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of wind towers from Canada,
Indonesia, and Vietnam during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States numbers listed in the ``Scope of
the Investigation,'' in the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Volume I of the Petitions at Exhibit I-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 22, 2019, Commerce released CBP data on imports of wind
towers under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with
access to information protected by APO.\29\ Interested parties wishing
to comment regarding the CBP data and respondent selection must do so
within three business days of the publication date of the notice of
initiation of these CVD investigations. Commerce will not accept
rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or respondent selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Commerce's Letters, ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from
Canada Countervailing Duty Petition: Release of Customs Data from
U.S. Customs and Border Protection'' dated July 22, 2019 (Canada CBP
Data Release Letter); ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from Indonesia
Countervailing Duty Petition: Release of Customs Data from U.S.
Customs and Border Protection'' dated July 22, 2019 (Indonesia CBP
Data Release Letter); and ``Utility Scale Wind Towers from the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam Countervailing Duty Petition: Release
of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection'' dated July
22, 2019 (Vietnam CBP Data Release Letter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 22, 2019, Commerce also released CBP data on imports of
wind towers from Indonesia under APO to all parties with access to
information protected by APO.\30\ Although the petitioner claims that
there are two known producers/exporters from Indonesia, record evidence
indicates that there is one known producer/exporter, PT Kenertec Power
System (Kenertec). Based on this evidence, Commerce intends to examine
Kenertec. Parties wishing to comment on Commerce's decision to
individually examine Kenertec 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Indonesia CBP Data Release Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CBP data identified two companies as producers/exporters of
wind towers in Vietnam: CS Wind Tower Co Ltd (CS Wind Tower) and
Metacor Vietnam Co., Ltd (Metacor Vietnam).\31\ Accordingly, Commerce
intends to examine the two producers/exporters identified in the CBP
data. Parties wishing to comment on the selection of CS Wind Tower and
Metacor Vietnam as mandatory respondents 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Vietnam CBP Data Release Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such
applications may be found on the Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An
electronically filed document must be received successfully, in its
entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the date noted above.
We intend to finalize our decisions regarding respondent selection
within 20 days of publication of this notice.
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been
provided to
[[Page 38220]]
the GOC, GOI, and GOV 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
702(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations 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, and
Vietnam are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a
U.S. industry.\32\ A negative ITC determination in any country will
result in the investigations being terminated with respect to that
country.\33\ Otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
\33\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission of Factual Information
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i)
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual
information described in (i)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires any
party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted
\34\ 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.\35\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\35\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extensions of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date.
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such
a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting
forth 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.\36\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).\37\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\37\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule''); see also
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, 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 702 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
[[Page 38221]]
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of the investigations is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2019-16887 Filed 8-5-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P