82_FR_34618 82 FR 34477 - Certain Tapered Roller Bearings From the Republic of Korea: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

82 FR 34477 - Certain Tapered Roller Bearings From the Republic of Korea: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 141 (July 25, 2017)

Page Range34477-34481
FR Document2017-15563

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 141 (Tuesday, July 25, 2017) 
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 25, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34477-34481]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15563]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-894]


Certain Tapered Roller Bearings From the Republic of Korea: 
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

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


DATES: Issued July 18, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blaine Wiltse at 202-482-6345, or 
Manuel Rey at 202-482-5518, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition

    On June 28, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received an antidumping duty (AD) petition concerning imports of 
certain tapered roller bearings (TRBs) from the Republic of Korea 
(Korea), filed in proper form, on behalf of the Timken Company (the 
petitioner).\1\ The petitioner is a domestic producer of TRBs.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Certain Tapered Roller Bearings from the Republic of 
Korea, dated June 28, 2017 (the Petition).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petition, at 1 and Exhibit I-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 3, 2017, the Department requested supplemental information 
pertaining to certain areas of the Petition.\3\ The petitioner filed 
its response to this request, including corrections to the margin 
calculations and revised scope language, on July 6, 2017.\4\ On July 
11, 2017, the petitioner filed an additional amendment to the 
Petition.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Department Letter re: Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Tapered Roller Bearings 
from the Republic of Korea: Supplemental Questions, dated July 3, 
2017.
    \4\ See Letter from the petitioner re: Petitioner's Response to 
the Department of Commerce's July 3, 2017 Supplemental Questionnaire 
Regarding the Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Tapered Roller Bearings from the Republic of Korea, dated 
July 6, 2017 (Petition Supplement).
    \5\ See Letter from the petitioner re: Petitioner's Scope 
Clarification Regarding the Antidumping Investigation on Certain 
Tapered Roller Bearings from the Republic of Korea, dated July 11, 
2017 (Scope Clarification).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of TRBs are 
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair 
value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such 
imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the 
domestic industry producing TRBs in the United States. Also, consistent 
with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is accompanied by 
information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its 
allegations.
    The Department finds that the petitioner filed this Petition on 
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested 
party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also 
finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with 
respect to the initiation of the AD investigation that the petitioner 
is requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' 
section, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on June 28, 2017, the period of 
investigation (POI) is April 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017.

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is TRBs from Korea. For a 
full description of the scope of this investigation, see the ``Scope of 
the Investigation,'' in the Appendix to this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigation

    During our review of the Petition, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, the petitioner pertaining to the 
proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition would 
be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic 
industry is seeking relief.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Petition Supplement, at 1-5 and Exhibit SQ-1; see also 
Scope Clarification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope).\8\ The Department 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,\9\ all such factual information should be limited to 
public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, 
the Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments 
by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Monday,

[[Page 34478]]

August 7, 2017, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of 
this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual 
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Thursday, August 17, 
2017, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comments deadline.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during 
this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that 
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the 
investigation may be relevant, the party may contact the Department and 
request permission to submit the additional information.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing 
Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ 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 deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 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 the Department'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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires

    The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to 
comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of TRBs to be 
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. This 
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the merchandise under consideration in order to report the relevant 
costs of production accurately as well as to develop appropriate 
product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. 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 used by manufacturers to 
describe TRBs, 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, the Department 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 1, 
2017. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 8, 
2017. All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
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 the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The U.S. 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 the Department 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, the Department'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 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 domestic like product distinct from the scope of 
the investigation. Based on our analysis of the information submitted 
on the record, we have determined that TRBs, as defined in the scope of 
the investigation, constitute a single domestic like product and we 
have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like 
product.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis, see 
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Tapered Roller 
Bearings from the Republic of Korea (Initiation Checklist), at 
Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping Duty 
Petition Covering Tapered Roller Bearings from the Republic of 
Korea, (Attachment II). This checklist is dated concurrently with, 
and hereby adopted by, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petition with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of

[[Page 34479]]

Investigation'' section above. To establish industry support, the 
petitioner provided its net sales in 2015 and compared its net sales to 
the estimated total shipments of the domestic like product in 2015 for 
the entire domestic industry.\15\ Because data regarding total 
production of the domestic like product are not reasonably available to 
the petitioner, and the petitioner has established that shipments are a 
reasonable proxy for production, we relied on the shipment data for 
purposes of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-8 and I-9 and Exhibit I-
2. The petitioner states that there are no publicly available 
sources of data for U.S. production of the domestic like product in 
2016. Therefore, the petitioner contends that shipment data from the 
U.S. Census Bureau's Annual Survey of Manufacturers provides the 
best available and reasonable proxy for U.S. production. The latest 
year for which such data are available is 2015. Id., at I-8, I-9 and 
Exhibit I-2; see also Petition Supplement, at SQ-10 and SQ-11.
    \16\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 5, 2017, we received a submission from RBC Oklahoma, Inc. 
(RBC), a domestic producer of TRBs. In the submission, RBC states that 
it supports the AD petition on TRBs from Korea. In addition, RBC 
provided its 2015 shipments of the domestic like product.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Letter from RBC Oklahoma, Inc., dated July 5, 2017, at 
1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have relied upon information provided in the Petition, Petition 
Supplement, and the letter provided by RBC for purposes of measuring 
industry support.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on information provided in the Petition, Petition Supplement, 
the letter from RBC, and other information readily available to the 
Department, we determine that the petitioner has met the statutory 
criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act 
because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition 
account for at least 25 percent of the total shipments \19\ of the 
domestic like product.\20\ Based on the information above, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act for the Petition 
because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petition 
account for more than 50 percent of the shipments of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the Petition. In addition, the information above 
establishes that the domestic producers and workers who support the 
Petition account for more than 50 percent of total shipments of the 
domestic like product, pursuant to section 734(c)(4)(D) of the Act. 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petition was filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) 
of the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ As mentioned above, the petitioner established that 
shipments are a reasonable proxy for production data. Section 
351.203(e)(1) of the Department's regulations states ``production 
levels may be established by reference to alternative data that the 
Secretary determines to be indicative of production levels.''
    \20\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petition on 
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the antidumping duty 
investigation that it is requesting the Department initiate.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegation and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the 
petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-20 and Exhibit I-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by the impact on the domestic industry's reduced market 
share; underselling and price depression or suppression; lost sales and 
revenues; decline in wages, hours, and employment; declines in 
production, capacity utilization, and shipments; decreases in capital 
expenditures; plant closure and declines in financial performance.\24\ 
We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding 
material injury, threat of material injury, and causation, and we have 
determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate 
evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id., at I-20--I-32, Exhibit I-7, Exhibit I-8, and Exhibits 
I-11 to I-16; see also Supplemental Response, at SQ-6.
    \25\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Antidumping Duty Petition Covering Certain Tapered Roller Bearings 
from the Republic of Korea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less 
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to 
initiate an AD investigation of imports of TRBs from Korea. The sources 
of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and 
NV are discussed in greater detail in the Initiation Checklist.

Export Price and Constructed Export Price

    The petitioner based the U.S. price on: (1) Average unit values 
(AUVs) of publicly-available import data for Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 8482.20.00.40, 8482.20.00.70, 
848220.00.81, and 848299.15.50, covering the period April 2016 through 
March 2017; \26\ and (2) price quotes for sales of TRBs produced in, 
and exported from, Korea and offered for sale in the United States.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Initiation Checklist.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the AUVs, the petitioner used export price (EP) 
methodology. The petitioner conservatively made no deductions from EP. 
With respect to the price quotes, the petitioner used constructed 
export price (CEP) methodology because it had reason to believe that 
sales are made through U.S. affiliates.\28\ Where applicable, the 
petitioner made deductions from CEP for movement expenses, consistent 
with the terms of sale.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Id.
    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    The petitioner was unable to obtain home market prices for TRBs 
and, therefore, calculated NV based on constructed value (CV).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on CV

    Pursuant to 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of 
manufacturing (COM); selling, general and administrative (SG&A) 
expenses; financial expenses; and packing expenses. The petitioner 
calculated COM during the POI, adjusted for known differences based on 
information available to the petitioner.\31\ Because publicly available 
information pertaining to the cost of raw materials in Korea was not 
reasonably available to it, the petitioner based its raw material cost 
calculations on its own

[[Page 34480]]

experience.\32\ The petitioner valued labor, electricity, and natural 
gas inputs using publicly available data multiplied by the product-
specific usage rates.\33\ Because publicly-available information 
pertaining to the cost of factory overhead in Korea was not reasonably 
available it, the petitioner based its factory overhead cost 
calculations on its own experience.\34\ To calculate the SG&A expense 
rate, the petitioner relied on the fiscal year end (FYE) December 31, 
2016, audited financial statements of Iljin Global Co., Ltd. (Iljin), a 
Korean producer of comparable merchandise.\35\ To calculate the 
financial expense rate, the petitioner relied on the FYE December 31, 
2016, audited financial statements of Iljin.\36\ Because Iljin's 
financial statements showed net financial income for FY 2016, the 
petitioner set the financial expense rate to zero and did not include 
financial expenses in its CV calculations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id.
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ Id.
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Id.
    \36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because, as noted above, the petitioner was unable to obtain 
information pertaining to home market prices, the petitioner calculated 
NV based on CV.\37\ Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists 
of the COM, SG&A, financial expenses, packing expenses, and profit. The 
petitioner calculated CV using the same COP described above, adding an 
amount for profit.\38\ The petitioner calculated the profit rate based 
on the FYE December 31, 2016, audited financial statements of 
Iljin.\39\ The profit rate was applied to the corresponding total COM, 
SG&A, and financial expenses calculated above to derive CV.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Id.
    \38\ Id.
    \39\ Id.
    \40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of TRBs from Korea, are being, or are likely to 
be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based on 
comparisons of EP and CEP to NV, in accordance with sections 772 and 
773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for TRBs from Korea are 
between 46.28 and 132.24 percent.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

    Based upon our examination, we find that the Petition meets the 
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an 
AD investigation to determine whether imports of TRBs from Korea are 
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair 
value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
    Under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous 
amendments to the AD and countervailing duty (CVD) law were made.\42\ 
The 2015 law does not specify dates of application for those 
amendments. On August 6, 2015, the Department published an 
interpretative rule, in which it announced the applicability dates for 
each amendment to the Act, except for amendments contained in section 
771(7) of the Act, which relate to determinations of material injury by 
the ITC.\43\ The amendments to sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of 
the Act are applicable to all determinations made on or after August 6, 
2015, and, therefore, apply to this AD investigation.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \43\ See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension 
Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015).
    \44\ Id. at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondent Selection

    The petitioner named 49 companies in Korea \45\ as producers/
exporters of TRBs. Following standard practice in AD investigations 
involving market economy countries, in the event the Department 
determines that the number of companies is large, the Department 
intends to review U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports of TRBs during the POI under the appropriate HTSUS 
subheadings, and if it determines that it cannot individually examine 
each company based upon the Department's resources, then the Department 
will select respondents based on those data. We intend to release CBP 
data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with 
access to information protected by APO within five business days of the 
announcement of the initiation of this investigation. Comments 
regarding the CBP data and respondent selection should be submitted 
seven calendar days after the placement of the CBP data on the record 
of this investigation. Interested parties wishing to submit rebuttal 
comments should submit those comments five calendar days after the 
deadline for initial comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit I-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 
days of publication of this notice. 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 Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition have been 
provided to the government of Korea via ACCESS. To the extent 
practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of 
the Petition to each exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 
19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of TRBs from Korea are materially injuring or 
threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.\46\ A negative ITC 
determination will result in this investigation being terminated.\47\ 
Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to statutory and 
regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \47\ 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 the Department; and (v) evidence other than 
factual information described in (i)-(iv). Any party, when submitting 
factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21) the information is

[[Page 34481]]

being submitted \48\ 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.\49\ Time limits for the submission of factual information are 
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based 
on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties 
should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information 
in this investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \49\ 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.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 
submitting factual information in this investigation.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\50\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their 
representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of a petition 
filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD 
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the 
formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final 
Rule.\51\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \51\ 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, the 
Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 
22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should 
ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the 
filing of letters of appearance as discussed in 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 18, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigation

    The scope of this investigation is certain tapered roller 
bearings. The scope covers all tapered roller bearings with a 
nominal outside cup diameter of eight inches and under, regardless 
of type of steel used to produce the bearing, whether of inch or 
metric size, and whether the tapered roller bearing is a thrust 
bearing or not. Certain tapered roller bearings include: Finished 
cup and cone assemblies entering as a set, finished cone assemblies 
entering separately, and finished parts (cups, cones, and tapered 
rollers). Certain tapered roller bearings are sold individually as a 
set (cup and cone assembly), as a cone assembly, as a finished cup, 
or packaged as a kit with one or several tapered roller bearings, a 
seal, and grease. The scope of the investigation includes finished 
rollers and finished cones that have not been assembled with rollers 
and a cage. Certain tapered roller bearings can be a single row or 
multiple rows (e.g., two- or four-row), and a cup can handle a 
single cone assembly or multiple cone assemblies.
    Finished cups, cones, and rollers differ from unfinished cups, 
cones, and rollers in that they have undergone further processing 
after heat treatment, including, but not limited to, final 
machining, grinding, and/or polishing. Mere heat treatment of a cup, 
cone, or roller (without any further processing after heat 
treatment) does not render the cup, cone, or roller a finished part 
for the purpose of this investigation. Finished tapered roller 
bearing parts are understood to mean parts which, at the time of 
importation, are ready for assembly (if further assembly is 
required) and require no further finishing or fabrication, such as 
grinding, lathing, machining, polishing, heat treatment, etc. 
Finished parts may require grease, bolting, and/or pressing as part 
of final assembly, and the requirement that these processes be 
performed, subsequent to importation, does not remove an otherwise 
finished tapered roller bearing from the scope.
    Tapered roller bearings that have a nominal outer cup diameter 
of eight inches and under that may be used in wheel hub units, rail 
bearings, or other housed bearings, but entered separately, are 
included in the scope to the same extent as described above. All 
tapered roller bearings meeting the written description above, and 
not otherwise excluded, are included, regardless of coating.
    Excluded from the scope of this investigation are:
    (1) Unfinished parts of tapered roller bearings (cups, cones, 
and tapered rollers);
    (2) cages, whether finished or unfinished;
    (3) the non-tapered roller bearing components of subject kits 
(e.g., grease, seal); and
    (4) tapered roller bearing wheel hub units, rail bearings, and 
other housed tapered roller bearings (flange, take up cartridges, 
and hanger units incorporating tapered rollers).
    Tapered roller bearings subject to this investigation are 
primarily classifiable under subheadings 8482.20.0040, 8482.20.0061, 
8482.20.0070, 8482.20.0081, 8482.91.0050, 8482.99.1550, and 
8482.99.1580 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS).\52\ Parts may also enter under 8482.99.4500. While the 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs 
purposes, the written description of the subject merchandise is 
dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Prior to July 2016, products entering under 8482.20.0061 
entered under 8482.20.0060, products entering under 8482.20.0081 
entered under 8482.20.0080, and products entering under 8482.99.1550 
entered under 8482.99.1540.

[FR Doc. 2017-15563 Filed 7-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 25, 2017 / Notices 34477 and Inmax Industries are subject to the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE sold in the United States at less than fair cash deposit rate currently assigned to value within the meaning of section 731 Inmax Sdn (i.e., 39.35 percent).8 International Trade Administration of the Act, and that such imports are Therefore, the Department will instruct [A–580–894] materially injuring, or threatening U.S. Customs and Border Protection to material injury to, the domestic industry continue suspension of liquidation and Certain Tapered Roller Bearings From producing TRBs in the United States. to collect estimated antidumping duties the Republic of Korea: Initiation of Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1) for all shipments of subject merchandise Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of the Act, the Petition is accompanied produced and exported by Inmax Sdn by information reasonably available to AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, the petitioner supporting its allegations. and/or Inmax Industries at the current International Trade Administration, The Department finds that the cash deposit rate currently applicable to Department of Commerce. petitioner filed this Petition on behalf of such entries, i.e., the cash deposit rate DATES: Issued July 18, 2017. the domestic industry because the of 39.35 percent assigned to Inmax Sdn, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: petitioner is an interested party as from the date of the publication of the defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Final Results.9 This cash deposit Blaine Wiltse at 202–482–6345, or Manuel Rey at 202–482–5518, AD/CVD The Department also finds that the requirement shall remain in effect until petitioner demonstrated sufficient further notice. Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade industry support with respect to the Notification to Parties Administration, U.S. Department of initiation of the AD investigation that Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue the petitioner is requesting.6 This notice is the only reminder to NW., Washington, DC 20230. Period of Investigation parties subject to administrative SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their Because the Petition was filed on June responsibility concerning the The Petition 28, 2017, the period of investigation disposition of proprietary information (POI) is April 1, 2016, through March On June 28, 2017, the U.S. disclosed under APO in accordance 31, 2017. Department of Commerce (the with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely Department) received an antidumping Scope of the Investigation written notification of the return or duty (AD) petition concerning imports The product covered by this destruction of APO materials or of certain tapered roller bearings (TRBs) investigation is TRBs from Korea. For a conversion to judicial protective order is from the Republic of Korea (Korea), filed full description of the scope of this hereby requested. Failure to comply in proper form, on behalf of the Timken investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the with the regulations and terms of an Company (the petitioner).1 The Investigation,’’ in the Appendix to this APO is a sanctionable violation. petitioner is a domestic producer of notice. TRBs.2 The Department is issuing and Comments on Scope of the Investigation On July 3, 2017, the Department publishing these results in accordance requested supplemental information During our review of the Petition, the with sections 751(b)(1) and (4) and pertaining to certain areas of the 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as Department issued questions to, and Petition.3 The petitioner filed its received responses from, the petitioner amended, and 19 CFR 351.216 and 19 response to this request, including pertaining to the proposed scope to CFR 351.221(c)(3)(i). corrections to the margin calculations ensure that the scope language in the Dated: July 14, 2017. and revised scope language, on July 6, Petition would be an accurate reflection Gary Taverman, 2017.4 On July 11, 2017, the petitioner of the products for which the domestic Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping filed an additional amendment to the industry is seeking relief.7 and Countervailing Duty Operations, Petition.5 As discussed in the preamble to the performing the non-exclusive functions and In accordance with section 732(b) of Department’s regulations, we are setting duties of the Assistant Secretary for the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the aside a period for interested parties to Enforcement and Compliance. Act), the petitioner alleges that imports raise issues regarding product coverage of TRBs are being, or are likely to be, (scope).8 The Department will consider Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in all comments received from interested the Issues and Decision Memorandum 1 See Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping parties and, if necessary, will consult Duties on Imports of Certain Tapered Roller I. Summary Bearings from the Republic of Korea, dated June 28, with interested parties prior to the II. Background 2017 (the Petition). issuance of the preliminary III. Scope of the Order 2 See Volume I of the Petition, at 1 and Exhibit determination. If scope comments IV. Discussion of Issues I–1. include factual information,9 all such 3 See Department Letter re: Petition for the V. Recommendation factual information should be limited to Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of [FR Doc. 2017–15518 Filed 7–24–17; 8:45 am] Certain Tapered Roller Bearings from the Republic public information. To facilitate of Korea: Supplemental Questions, dated July 3, preparation of its questionnaires, the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 2017. Department requests all interested 4 See Letter from the petitioner re: Petitioner’s parties to submit such comments by Response to the Department of Commerce’s July 3, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Monday, 2017 Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding the mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 6 See ‘‘Determination of Industry Support for the on Imports of Tapered Roller Bearings from the Republic of Korea, dated July 6, 2017 (Petition Petition’’ section, below. 7 See Petition Supplement, at 1–5 and Exhibit Supplement). 5 See Letter from the petitioner re: Petitioner’s SQ–1; see also Scope Clarification. 8 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Scope Clarification Regarding the Antidumping Investigation on Certain Tapered Roller Bearings Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 8 See the Order, 80 FR 39994 (July 13, 2015). from the Republic of Korea, dated July 11, 2017 9 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual 9 Id. (Scope Clarification). information’’). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:30 Jul 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JYN1.SGM 25JYN1

34478 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 25, 2017 / Notices August 7, 2017, which is 20 calendar are relevant to the development of an to determine whether a petition has the days from the signature date of this accurate list of physical characteristics. requisite industry support, the statute notice. Any rebuttal comments, which Specifically, they may provide directs the Department to look to may include factual information, must comments as to which characteristics producers and workers who produce the be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Thursday, are appropriate to use as: (1) General domestic like product. The U.S. August 17, 2017, which is 10 calendar product characteristics and (2) product- International Trade Commission (ITC), days from the initial comments comparison criteria. We note that it is which is responsible for determining deadline.10 not always appropriate to use all whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has The Department requests that any product characteristics as product- been injured, must also determine what factual information the parties consider comparison criteria. We base product- constitutes a domestic like product in relevant to the scope of the investigation comparison criteria on meaningful order to define the industry. While both be submitted during this time period. commercial differences among products. the Department and the ITC must apply However, if a party subsequently finds In other words, although there may be the same statutory definition regarding that additional factual information some physical product characteristics the domestic like product,12 they do so pertaining to the scope of the used by manufacturers to describe for different purposes and pursuant to a investigation may be relevant, the party TRBs, it may be that only a select few separate and distinct authority. In may contact the Department and request product characteristics take into account addition, the Department’s permission to submit the additional commercially meaningful physical determination is subject to limitations of information. characteristics. In addition, interested time and information. Although this parties may comment on the order in may result in different definitions of the Filing Requirements which the physical characteristics like product, such differences do not All submissions to the Department should be used in matching products. render the decision of either agency must be filed electronically using Generally, the Department attempts to contrary to law.13 Enforcement and Compliance’s list the most important physical Section 771(10) of the Act defines the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing characteristics first and the least domestic like product as ‘‘a product Duty Centralized Electronic Service important characteristics last. which is like, or in the absence of like, System (ACCESS).11 An electronically In order to consider the suggestions of most similar in characteristics and uses filed document must be received interested parties in developing and with, the article subject to an successfully in its entirety by the time issuing the AD questionnaires, all investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the and date it is due. Documents exempted product characteristics comments must reference point from which the from the electronic submission be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 1, domestic like product analysis begins is requirements must be filed manually 2017. Any rebuttal comments must be ‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on August 8, 2017. (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, All comments and submissions to the be investigated, which normally will be Room 18022, U.S. Department of Department must be filed electronically the scope as defined in the petition). Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue using ACCESS, as explained above. With regard to the domestic like NW., Washington, DC 20230, and product, the petitioner does not offer a Determination of Industry Support for stamped with the date and time of definition of domestic like product the Petition receipt by the applicable deadline. distinct from the scope of the Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires investigation. Based on our analysis of Comments on Product Characteristics that a petition be filed on behalf of the the information submitted on the for AD Questionnaires domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) record, we have determined that TRBs, of the Act provides that a petition meets as defined in the scope of the The Department will provide this requirement if the domestic investigation, constitute a single interested parties an opportunity to producers or workers who support the domestic like product and we have comment on the appropriate physical petition account for: (i) At least 25 analyzed industry support in terms of characteristics of TRBs to be reported in percent of the total production of the that domestic like product.14 response to the Department’s AD domestic like product; and (ii) more In determining whether the petitioner questionnaires. This information will be than 50 percent of the production of the has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) used to identify the key physical domestic like product produced by that of the Act, we considered the industry characteristics of the merchandise under portion of the industry expressing support data contained in the Petition consideration in order to report the support for, or opposition to, the with reference to the domestic like relevant costs of production accurately petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of as well as to develop appropriate of the Act provides that, if the petition product-comparison criteria. does not establish support of domestic 12 See section 771(10) of the Act. Interested parties may provide any producers or workers accounting for 13 See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. information or comments that they feel 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. more than 50 percent of the total v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), 10 See 19 CFR 351.303(b). production of the domestic like product, aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 11 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty the Department shall: (i) Poll the 14 For a discussion of the domestic like product Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; industry or rely on other information in analysis, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR order to determine if there is support for Initiation Checklist: Tapered Roller Bearings from 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and the petition, as required by the Republic of Korea (Initiation Checklist), at mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) for details subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine Antidumping Duty Petition Covering Tapered of the Department’s electronic filing requirements, industry support using a statistically Roller Bearings from the Republic of Korea, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. valid sampling method to poll the (Attachment II). This checklist is dated Information on help using ACCESS can be found at ‘‘industry.’’ concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/ Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20 the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 Procedures.pdf. whole of a domestic like product. Thus, of the main Department of Commerce building. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:30 Jul 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JYN1.SGM 25JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 25, 2017 / Notices 34479 Investigation’’ section above. To expressing support for, or opposition to, Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair establish industry support, the the Petition. In addition, the Value petitioner provided its net sales in 2015 information above establishes that the The following is a description of the and compared its net sales to the domestic producers and workers who allegation of sales at less than fair value estimated total shipments of the support the Petition account for more upon which the Department based its domestic like product in 2015 for the than 50 percent of total shipments of the entire domestic industry.15 Because data decision to initiate an AD investigation domestic like product, pursuant to of imports of TRBs from Korea. The regarding total production of the section 734(c)(4)(D) of the Act. domestic like product are not sources of data for the deductions and Accordingly, the Department adjustments relating to U.S. price and reasonably available to the petitioner, determines that the Petition was filed on NV are discussed in greater detail in the and the petitioner has established that behalf of the domestic industry within Initiation Checklist. shipments are a reasonable proxy for production, we relied on the shipment the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Export Price and Constructed Export data for purposes of measuring industry Act.21 Price support.16 The Department finds that the On July 5, 2017, we received a petitioner filed the Petition on behalf of The petitioner based the U.S. price submission from RBC Oklahoma, Inc. the domestic industry because it is an on: (1) Average unit values (AUVs) of (RBC), a domestic producer of TRBs. In interested party as defined in section publicly-available import data for the submission, RBC states that it Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has supports the AD petition on TRBs from United States (HTSUS) subheadings demonstrated sufficient industry Korea. In addition, RBC provided its 8482.20.00.40, 8482.20.00.70, support with respect to the antidumping 2015 shipments of the domestic like 848220.00.81, and 848299.15.50, duty investigation that it is requesting covering the period April 2016 through product.17 the Department initiate.22 We have relied upon information March 2017; 26 and (2) price quotes for provided in the Petition, Petition Allegation and Evidence of Material sales of TRBs produced in, and exported Supplement, and the letter provided by Injury and Causation from, Korea and offered for sale in the RBC for purposes of measuring industry United States.27 support.18 The petitioner alleges that the U.S. With respect to the AUVs, the Based on information provided in the industry producing the domestic like petitioner used export price (EP) Petition, Petition Supplement, the letter product is being materially injured, or is methodology. The petitioner from RBC, and other information readily threatened with material injury, by conservatively made no deductions available to the Department, we reason of the imports of the subject from EP. With respect to the price determine that the petitioner has met merchandise sold at less than normal quotes, the petitioner used constructed the statutory criteria for industry value (NV). In addition, the petitioner export price (CEP) methodology because support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of alleges that subject imports exceed the it had reason to believe that sales are the Act because the domestic producers negligibility threshold provided for made through U.S. affiliates.28 Where (or workers) who support the Petition under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.23 applicable, the petitioner made account for at least 25 percent of the deductions from CEP for movement total shipments 19 of the domestic like The petitioner contends that the expenses, consistent with the terms of product.20 Based on the information industry’s injured condition is sale.29 above, the domestic producers (or illustrated by the impact on the workers) have met the statutory criteria domestic industry’s reduced market Normal Value for industry support under section share; underselling and price depression The petitioner was unable to obtain 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act for the or suppression; lost sales and revenues; home market prices for TRBs and, Petition because the domestic producers decline in wages, hours, and therefore, calculated NV based on (or workers) who support the Petition employment; declines in production, constructed value (CV).30 account for more than 50 percent of the capacity utilization, and shipments; shipments of the domestic like product decreases in capital expenditures; plant Normal Value Based on CV produced by that portion of the industry closure and declines in financial Pursuant to 773(e) of the Act, CV performance.24 We have assessed the consists of the cost of manufacturing 15 See Volume I of the Petition, at I–8 and I–9 and Exhibit I–2. The petitioner states that there are no allegations and supporting evidence (COM); selling, general and publicly available sources of data for U.S. regarding material injury, threat of administrative (SG&A) expenses; production of the domestic like product in 2016. material injury, and causation, and we financial expenses; and packing Therefore, the petitioner contends that shipment have determined that these allegations expenses. The petitioner calculated data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Annual Survey of Manufacturers provides the best available and are properly supported by adequate COM during the POI, adjusted for reasonable proxy for U.S. production. The latest evidence, and meet the statutory known differences based on information year for which such data are available is 2015. Id., requirements for initiation.25 available to the petitioner.31 Because at I–8, I–9 and Exhibit I–2; see also Petition publicly available information Supplement, at SQ–10 and SQ–11. 16 See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 21 Id. pertaining to the cost of raw materials 17 See Letter from RBC Oklahoma, Inc., dated July 22 Id. in Korea was not reasonably available to 5, 2017, at 1–2. 23 See Volume I of the Petition, at I–20 and it, the petitioner based its raw material mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES 18 See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. Exhibit I–10. cost calculations on its own 19 As mentioned above, the petitioner established 24 Id., at I–20—I–32, Exhibit I–7, Exhibit I–8, and that shipments are a reasonable proxy for Exhibits I–11 to I–16; see also Supplemental 26 See Initiation Checklist. production data. Section 351.203(e)(1) of the Response, at SQ–6. 27 Id. Department’s regulations states ‘‘production levels 25 See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 28 Id. may be established by reference to alternative data Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material 29 Id. that the Secretary determines to be indicative of Injury and Causation for the Antidumping Duty production levels.’’ Petition Covering Certain Tapered Roller Bearings 30 Id. 20 See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. from the Republic of Korea. 31 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:30 Jul 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JYN1.SGM 25JYN1

34480 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 25, 2017 / Notices experience.32 The petitioner valued are initiating an AD investigation to should submit those comments five labor, electricity, and natural gas inputs determine whether imports of TRBs calendar days after the deadline for using publicly available data multiplied from Korea are being, or are likely to be, initial comments. by the product-specific usage rates.33 sold in the United States at less than fair Comments must be filed Because publicly-available information value. In accordance with section electronically using ACCESS. An pertaining to the cost of factory 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR electronically-filed document must be overhead in Korea was not reasonably 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will received successfully, in its entirety, by available it, the petitioner based its make our preliminary determination no ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on factory overhead cost calculations on its later than 140 days after the date of this the date noted above. We intend to own experience.34 To calculate the initiation. make our decision regarding respondent SG&A expense rate, the petitioner relied Under the Trade Preferences selection within 20 days of publication on the fiscal year end (FYE) December Extension Act of 2015, numerous of this notice. Interested parties must 31, 2016, audited financial statements of amendments to the AD and submit applications for disclosure under Iljin Global Co., Ltd. (Iljin), a Korean countervailing duty (CVD) law were APO in accordance with 19 CFR producer of comparable merchandise.35 made.42 The 2015 law does not specify 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such To calculate the financial expense rate, dates of application for those applications may be found on the the petitioner relied on the FYE amendments. On August 6, 2015, the Department’s Web site at http:// December 31, 2016, audited financial Department published an interpretative enforcement.trade.gov/apo. statements of Iljin.36 Because Iljin’s rule, in which it announced the financial statements showed net Distribution of Copies of the Petition applicability dates for each amendment financial income for FY 2016, the to the Act, except for amendments In accordance with section petitioner set the financial expense rate contained in section 771(7) of the Act, 732(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR to zero and did not include financial which relate to determinations of 351.202(f), copies of the public version expenses in its CV calculations. material injury by the ITC.43 The of the Petition have been provided to Because, as noted above, the amendments to sections 771(15), 773, the government of Korea via ACCESS. petitioner was unable to obtain 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable To the extent practicable, we will information pertaining to home market to all determinations made on or after attempt to provide a copy of the public prices, the petitioner calculated NV August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply to version of the Petition to each exporter based on CV.37 Pursuant to section this AD investigation.44 named in the Petition, as provided 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). COM, SG&A, financial expenses, Respondent Selection packing expenses, and profit. The ITC Notification The petitioner named 49 companies petitioner calculated CV using the same in Korea 45 as producers/exporters of We will notify the ITC of our COP described above, adding an amount TRBs. Following standard practice in initiation, as required by section 732(d) for profit.38 The petitioner calculated AD investigations involving market of the Act. the profit rate based on the FYE economy countries, in the event the December 31, 2016, audited financial Preliminary Determination by the ITC Department determines that the number statements of Iljin.39 The profit rate was of companies is large, the Department The ITC will preliminarily determine, applied to the corresponding total COM, intends to review U.S. Customs and within 45 days after the date on which SG&A, and financial expenses Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. the Petition was filed, whether there is calculated above to derive CV.40 imports of TRBs during the POI under a reasonable indication that imports of the appropriate HTSUS subheadings, TRBs from Korea are materially injuring Fair Value Comparisons and if it determines that it cannot or threatening material injury to a U.S. Based on the data provided by the individually examine each company industry.46 A negative ITC petitioner, there is reason to believe that based upon the Department’s resources, determination will result in this imports of TRBs from Korea, are being, then the Department will select investigation being terminated.47 or are likely to be, sold in the United respondents based on those data. We Otherwise, this investigation will States at less than fair value. Based on intend to release CBP data under proceed according to statutory and comparisons of EP and CEP to NV, in Administrative Protective Order (APO) regulatory time limits. accordance with sections 772 and 773 of to all parties with access to information the Act, the estimated dumping margins Submission of Factual Information protected by APO within five business for TRBs from Korea are between 46.28 days of the announcement of the Factual information is defined in 19 and 132.24 percent.41 initiation of this investigation. CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence Comments regarding the CBP data and submitted in response to questionnaires; Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value respondent selection should be (ii) evidence submitted in support of Investigation submitted seven calendar days after the allegations; (iii) publicly available Based upon our examination, we find information to value factors under 19 that the Petition meets the requirements placement of the CBP data on the record of this investigation. Interested parties CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR wishing to submit rebuttal comments 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on 32 Id. 42 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, the record by the Department; and (v) 33 Id. evidence other than factual information mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES 34 Id. Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). 35 Id. 43 See Dates of Application of Amendments to the described in (i)–(iv). Any party, when 36 Id. Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws Made submitting factual information, to by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, 80 37 Id. FR 46793 (August 6, 2015). specify under which subsection of 19 38 Id. 44 Id. at 46794–95. The 2015 amendments may be CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is 39 Id. found at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th- 40 Id. congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl. 46 See section 733(a) of the Act. 41 See Initiation Checklist. 45 See Volume I of the Petition, at Exhibit I–6. 47 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:30 Jul 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JYN1.SGM 25JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 25, 2017 / Notices 34481 being submitted 48 and, if the CVD proceedings initiated on or after after heat treatment, including, but not information is submitted to rebut, August 16, 2013, should use the formats limited to, final machining, grinding, and/or clarify, or correct factual information for the revised certifications provided at polishing. Mere heat treatment of a cup, cone, or roller (without any further already on the record, to provide an the end of the Final Rule.51 The processing after heat treatment) does not explanation identifying the information Department intends to reject factual render the cup, cone, or roller a finished part already on the record that the factual submissions if the submitting party does for the purpose of this investigation. Finished information seeks to rebut, clarify, or not comply with applicable revised tapered roller bearing parts are understood to correct.49 Time limits for the certification requirements. mean parts which, at the time of importation, submission of factual information are are ready for assembly (if further assembly is addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which Notification to Interested Parties required) and require no further finishing or provides specific time limits based on Interested parties must submit fabrication, such as grinding, lathing, machining, polishing, heat treatment, etc. the type of factual information being applications for disclosure under APO Finished parts may require grease, bolting, submitted. Interested parties should in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On and/or pressing as part of final assembly, and review the regulations prior to January 22, 2008, the Department the requirement that these processes be submitting factual information in this published Antidumping and performed, subsequent to importation, does investigation. Countervailing Duty Proceedings: not remove an otherwise finished tapered Documents Submission Procedures; roller bearing from the scope. Extensions of Time Limits Tapered roller bearings that have a APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January Parties may request an extension of 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate nominal outer cup diameter of eight inches time limits before the expiration of a and under that may be used in wheel hub in this investigation should ensure that time limit established under 19 CFR units, rail bearings, or other housed bearings, they meet the requirements of these but entered separately, are included in the 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of scope to the same extent as described above. Secretary. In general, an extension appearance as discussed in 19 CFR All tapered roller bearings meeting the request will be considered untimely if it 351.103(d)). written description above, and not otherwise is filed after the expiration of the time This notice is issued and published excluded, are included, regardless of coating. limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) Excluded from the scope of this For submissions that are due from of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c). investigation are: multiple parties simultaneously, an (1) Unfinished parts of tapered roller Dated: July 18, 2017. bearings (cups, cones, and tapered rollers); extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET Gary Taverman, (2) cages, whether finished or unfinished; Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping (3) the non-tapered roller bearing on the due date. Under certain components of subject kits (e.g., grease, seal); circumstances, we may elect to specify and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and and a different time limit by which (4) tapered roller bearing wheel hub units, duties of the Assistant Secretary for extension requests will be considered Enforcement and Compliance. rail bearings, and other housed tapered roller untimely for submissions which are due bearings (flange, take up cartridges, and from multiple parties simultaneously. In Appendix hanger units incorporating tapered rollers). such a case, we will inform parties in Tapered roller bearings subject to this Scope of the Investigation investigation are primarily classifiable under the letter or memorandum setting forth The scope of this investigation is certain subheadings 8482.20.0040, 8482.20.0061, the deadline (including a specified time) tapered roller bearings. The scope covers all 8482.20.0070, 8482.20.0081, 8482.91.0050, by which extension requests must be tapered roller bearings with a nominal 8482.99.1550, and 8482.99.1580 of the filed to be considered timely. An outside cup diameter of eight inches and Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United extension request must be made in a under, regardless of type of steel used to States (HTSUS).52 Parts may also enter under separate, stand-alone submission; under produce the bearing, whether of inch or 8482.99.4500. While the HTSUS subheadings limited circumstances we will grant metric size, and whether the tapered roller are provided for convenience and for untimely-filed requests for the extension bearing is a thrust bearing or not. Certain customs purposes, the written description of of time limits. Parties should review tapered roller bearings include: Finished cup the subject merchandise is dispositive. and cone assemblies entering as a set, [FR Doc. 2017–15563 Filed 7–24–17; 8:45 am] Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 finished cone assemblies entering separately, FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), and finished parts (cups, cones, and tapered BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ rollers). Certain tapered roller bearings are pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013- sold individually as a set (cup and cone 22853.htm, prior to submitting factual assembly), as a cone assembly, as a finished DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE information in this investigation. cup, or packaged as a kit with one or several tapered roller bearings, a seal, and grease. International Trade Administration Certification Requirements The scope of the investigation includes [C–475–819] Any party submitting factual finished rollers and finished cones that have information in an AD or CVD not been assembled with rollers and a cage. Certain Pasta From Italy: Preliminary proceeding must certify to the accuracy Certain tapered roller bearings can be a single Results of Countervailing Duty row or multiple rows (e.g., two- or four-row), and completeness of that information.50 Administrative Review; 2015 and a cup can handle a single cone assembly Parties are hereby reminded that revised or multiple cone assemblies. AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, certification requirements are in effect Finished cups, cones, and rollers differ International Trade Administration, for company/government officials, as from unfinished cups, cones, and rollers in Department of Commerce. mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES well as their representatives. that they have undergone further processing SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Investigations initiated on the basis of a petition filed on or after August 16, 51 See Certification of Factual Information to (the Department) is conducting an 2013, and other segments of any AD or Import Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 52 Prior to July 2016, products entering under 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also Frequently Asked 8482.20.0061 entered under 8482.20.0060, products 48 See 19 CFR 351.301(b). Questions regarding the Final Rule, available at entering under 8482.20.0081 entered under 49 See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ 8482.20.0080, and products entering under 50 See section 782(b) of the Act. info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 8482.99.1550 entered under 8482.99.1540. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:30 Jul 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JYN1.SGM 25JYN1


Document Created: 2018-10-24 11:21:50
Document Modified: 2018-10-24 11:21:50
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
DatesIssued July 18, 2017.
ContactBlaine Wiltse at 202-482-6345, or Manuel Rey at 202-482-5518, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.
FR Citation82 FR 34477 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR