Hand Trucks From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice of Amended Final Results, 35939-35941 [2012-14795]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Notices
15, 2012. Subject to the rules of origin
in Annex 4.1 of the Agreement,
pursuant to the textile provisions of the
Agreement, fabric, yarn, and fiber
produced in Colombia or the United
States and traded between the two
countries are entitled to duty-free tariff
treatment. Annex 3–B of the Agreement
also lists specific fabrics, yarns, and
fibers that the two countries agreed are
not available in commercial quantities
in a timely manner from producers in
Colombia or the United States. The
fabrics listed are commercially
unavailable fabrics, yarns, and fibers,
which are also entitled to duty-free
treatment despite not being produced in
Colombia or the United States.
The list of commercially unavailable
fabrics, yarns, and fibers may be
changed pursuant to the commercial
availability provision in Chapter 3,
Article 3.3, Paragraphs 5–7 of the
Agreement. Under this provision,
interested entities from Colombia or the
United States have the right to request
that a specific fabric, yarn, or fiber be
added to, or removed from, the list of
commercially unavailable fabrics, yarns,
and fibers in Annex 3–B of the
Agreement.
Chapter 3, Article 3.3, paragraph 7 of
the Agreement requires that the
President ‘‘promptly’’ publish
procedures for parties to exercise the
right to make these requests. Section
203(o)(4) of the Act authorizes the
President to establish procedures to
modify the list of fabrics, yarns, or fibers
not available in commercial quantities
in a timely manner in either the United
States or Colombia as set out in Annex
3–B of the Agreement. The President
delegated the responsibility for
publishing the procedures and
administering commercial availability
requests to the Committee for the
Implementation of Textile Agreements
(‘‘CITA’’), which issues procedures and
acts on requests through the U.S.
Department of Commerce, Office of
Textiles and Apparel (‘‘OTEXA’’) (See
Proclamation No. 8818, 77 FR 29519,
May 18, 2012).
The intent of the U.S.-Colombia TPA
Commercial Availability Procedures is
to foster the use of U.S. and regional
products by implementing procedures
that allow products to be placed on or
removed from a product list, on a timely
basis, and in a manner that is consistent
with normal business practice. The
procedures are intended to facilitate the
transmission of requests; allow the
market to indicate the availability of the
supply of products that are the subject
of requests; make available promptly, to
interested entities and the public,
information regarding the requests for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
products and offers received for those
products; ensure wide participation by
interested entities and parties; allow for
careful review and consideration of
information provided to substantiate
requests, responses and rebuttals; and
provide timely public dissemination of
information used by CITA in making
commercial availability determinations.
CITA must collect certain information
about fabric, yarn, or fiber technical
specifications and the production
capabilities of Colombian and U.S.
textile producers to determine whether
certain fabrics, yarns, or fibers are
available in commercial quantities in a
timely manner in the United States or
Colombia, subject to Section 203(o) of
the Act.
II. Method of Collection
Participants in a commercial
availability proceeding must submit
public versions of their Requests,
Responses or Rebuttals electronically
(via email) for posting on OTEXA’s Web
site. Confidential versions of those
submissions which contain business
confidential information must be
delivered in hard copy to OTEXA at the
U.S. Department of Commerce.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: None.
Form Number(s): None.
Type of Review: Regular submission
(new information collection).
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
16.
Estimated Time per Response: 8 hours
per Request, 2 hours per Response, and
1 hour per Rebuttal.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 89.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $5,340.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35939
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Dated: June 12, 2012.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012–14677 Filed 6–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–891]
Hand Trucks From the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With Final
Results and Notice of Amended Final
Results
On June 4, 2012, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) issued its mandate in
Qingdao Taifa Group Co. v. United
States, 780 F. Supp. 2d 1342 (Fed. Cir.
2012), affirming the Court of
International Trade’s (‘‘CIT’’) or
(‘‘Court’’) decision in Qingdao Taifa
Group Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court
No. 08–00245, Slip Op. 11–83 (CIT
2011) sustaining the Department of
Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’’) final
results of its third redetermination
pursuant to the CIT’s remand order in
Qingdao Taifa Group Co. Ltd. v. United
States, Court No. 08–00245, Slip Op.
10–126 (CIT 2010) (‘‘Remand III’’).1
Consistent with the decision of the
CAFC in Timken Co. v. United States,
893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
(‘‘Timken’’), as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
(‘‘Diamond Sawblades’’), the
Department is notifying the public that
the final judgment in this case is not in
harmony with the Department’s final
results and is amending the final results
of the 2005–2006 administrative review
of hand trucks from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) with respect
to the margin assigned to Qingdao Taifa
Group Co. Ltd. (‘‘Taifa’’) covering the
period of review (‘‘POR’’) December 1,
2005, through November 30, 2006.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 14, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brooke Kennedy, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
SUMMARY:
1 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
To Court Remand, Court No. 08–00245, dated
March 17, 2011, available at: https://
www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/
(‘‘Redetermination III’’).
E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM
15JNN1
35940
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3818.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Final Results,2 the Department applied
total adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’) to
Taifa because we found that Taifa
withheld information that had been
requested, significantly impeded the
proceeding and provided information
that could not be verified. Additionally,
the Department found evidence at
verification which indicated local
government ownership over Taifa, and
contradicted Taifa’s submitted
questionnaire responses. As such, the
Department determined that Taifa failed
to fully explain the ownership interests
in the company and because of this,
Taifa failed to demonstrate entitlement
to a separate rate. Accordingly, the
Department applied the PRC-wide rate
of 383.60 percent to Taifa for the POR.
On August 11, 2009, the CIT remanded
the Final Results to the Department in
Remand I.3 The Court sustained the
Department’s decision to apply AFA to
Taifa, however, the Court remanded the
matter to the Department to determine
whether the local government
ownership resulted in de facto control
such that the Department could treat
Taifa as part of the PRC-wide entity.
Further, the Court held that because the
PRC-wide entity rate presumes
government control, the Department is
not permitted to select the PRC-wide
rate as the AFA rate without first
making a determination about the
presence or absence of de facto
government control over Taifa.4
On January 22, 2010, the Department
issued a hand trucks redetermination,
Redetermination I.5 Pursuant to Remand
I, we determined that the record did not
contain affirmative evidence that a
government entity exercised de facto
control over Taifa, so we granted Taifa
a separate rate and assigned an AFA
margin based on a control numberspecific margin from the most recently
completed segment of the proceeding in
which Taifa participated as a mandatory
respondent. Specifically, the margin
was calculated from Taifa’s own
reported information and data from the
investigation. The Department’s
2 See Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof
from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results
of 2005–2006 Administrative Review, 73 FR 43684
(July 28, 2008) (‘‘Final Results’’).
3 See Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v. United
States, 637 F. Supp. 2d 1231, 1244 (CIT 2009)
(‘‘Remand I’’).
4 See id.
5 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
To Court Remand, Court No. 08–00245, dated
January 22, 2010, (‘‘Redetermination I’’) available
at: https://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
redetermination resulted in changing
Taifa’s margin from 383.60 percent to
227.73 percent.
On May 12, 2010, the CIT remanded
the matter a second time in Remand II,
finding that the Department had failed
to meaningfully investigate the question
of government control.6 The CIT
declined to decide whether the 227.73
percent rate provided by the Department
was supported, but required the
Department to make a decision
supported by substantial evidence about
Taifa’s independence from or control by
the Chinese government.7
On July 27, 2010, the Department
issued its second redetermination,
Redetermination II,8 in which we found
that because the information provided
by Taifa regarding its ownership was
unreliable, the Department was unable
to conclude based on substantial
evidence that Taifa was de facto free of
government control and thus entitled to
a separate rate. Therefore the
Department assigned Taifa the PRCentity rate of 383.60 percent.
The CIT ruled on Redetermination II
on November 12, 2010, and once again
remanded back to the Department
Remand III ordering that we either
explain why substantial record evidence
supports a finding of central
government control thereby justifying
imposition of the PRC-wide entity rate,
or that we grant Taifa a separate rate
‘‘grounded in the realities of the
industry.’’ 9
Pursuant to Remand III, on March 27,
2011, the Department issued its third
redetermination, Redetermination III,
this time granting Taifa a separate rate,
concluding after re-weighing the
evidence that there was not substantial
record evidence that the central
government controlled Taifa’s business
decisions.10 The Department assigned a
rate of 145.90 percent based on 36
percent of Taifa’s total sales by quantity
from the prior segment of the
proceeding when Taifa was a
cooperative respondent. The CIT
sustained Redetermination III on July
12, 2011, holding that the Department
corroborated the rate to the extent
practicable, the rate was not punitive
6 Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v. United States,
710 F. Supp. 2d 1352, 1357 (CIT 2012) (‘‘Remand
II’’).
7 See id. at 1358.
8 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
To Court Remand, Court No. 08–00245, dated July
27, 2010, (‘‘Redetermination II’’) available at: https://
www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/.
9 See id., at 1385, 1386.
10 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
To Court Remand, Court No. 08–00245, dated
March 27, 2011, available at: https://
www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/
(‘‘Redetermination III’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
nor so out of touch with Taifa’s practice
as to be aberrational, and the
Department used a reasonable
methodology to calculate the rate.11
After hearing the issue on appeal, on
June 4, 2012, the CAFC affirmed the
CIT’s July 12, 2011 opinion, sustaining
Redetermination III.12
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC has
held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), the Department must publish a
notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with a Department
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The
CAFC’s decision sustaining the
Department’s remand redetermination
with respect to Taifa constitutes a final
decision of that court that is not in
harmony with the Department’s Final
Results. This notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken. Accordingly,
the Department will continue the
suspension of liquidation of the subject
merchandise pending the expiration of
the time for application for a writ of
certiorari, or if a writ of certiorari is
granted, pending a final and conclusive
court decision.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
decision, we are amending the Final
Results to reflect the results of the
litigation. The revised weighted-average
dumping margin is as follows:
Exporter
Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd ........
Percent
margin
145.90
Accordingly, if there is no writ of
certiorari granted in this case, the
Department will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to assess
antidumping duties on entries of the
subject merchandise exported by Taifa
during the POR at 145.90 percent.
Additionally, because Taifa has not
participated in any administrative
reviews since the December 1, 2005,
through November 30, 2006
administrative review, Taifa’s cash
deposit rate will be 145.90 percent,
effective June 14, 2012 (i.e., 10 days
after the issuance of the CAFC
mandate).
11 Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Court No. 08–00245, Slip Op. 11–83 (CIT
Jul. 12, 2011).
12 Qingdao Taifa Group Co. v. United States, 2012
U.S. App. LEXIS 7281 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 11, 2012).
E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM
15JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2012 / Notices
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(c)(1),
735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 13, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012–14795 Filed 6–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Environmental Technologies Trade
Advisory Committee Public Meeting
International Trade
Administration, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Federal advisory
committee meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice sets forth the
schedule and proposed agenda of a
meeting of the Environmental
Technologies Trade Advisory
Committee (ETTAC).
DATES: The meeting is scheduled for
Friday, July 20, 2012, at 9 a.m. Eastern
Daylight Time (EDT).
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in
Room 1412 at the U.S. Department of
Commerce, Herbert Clark Hoover
Building, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Todd DeLelle, Office of Energy &
Environmental Industries (OEEI),
International Trade Administration,
Room 4053, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230. (Phone:
202–482–4877; Fax: 202–482–5665;
email: todd.delelle@trade.gov). This
meeting is physically accessible to
people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to
OEEI at (202) 482–5225 no less than one
week prior to the meeting.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
meeting will take place from 9:00 a.m.
to 3:30 p.m. EDT. This meeting is open
to the public and time will be permitted
for public comment from 3:00–3:30 p.m.
EDT. Written comments concerning
ETTAC affairs are welcome any time
before or after the meeting. Minutes will
be available within 30 days of this
meeting.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
Topics To Be Considered
The agenda for the July 20, 2011
ETTAC meeting will include discussion
of various issues and policies that affect
environmental trade. These subjects will
encompass the harmonization of global
environmental regulations, standards,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Jun 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
and certification programs; analysis of
existing environmental goods and
services data sources; development of
trade promotion programs; and issues
related to innovation in the
environmental technology sector.
Background: The ETTAC is mandated
by Public Law 103–392. It was created
to advise the U.S. government on
environmental trade policies and
programs, and to help it to focus its
resources on increasing the exports of
the U.S. environmental industry.
ETTAC operates as an advisory
committee to the Secretary of Commerce
and the Trade Promotion Coordinating
Committee (TPCC). ETTAC was
originally chartered in May of 1994. It
was most recently re-chartered until
October 2012.
Edward A. O’Malley,
Director, Office of Energy and Environmental
Industries.
[FR Doc. 2012–14511 Filed 6–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
Commerce Spectrum Management
Advisory Committee Meeting
National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice announces a
public meeting of the Commerce
Spectrum Management Advisory
Committee (Committee). The Committee
provides advice to the Assistant
Secretary of Commerce for
Communications and Information on
spectrum management policy matters.
DATES: The meeting will be held on July
24, 2012, from 1:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.,
Mountain Daylight Savings Time.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Institute for Telecommunication
Sciences, Conference Room 1107, 325
Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305–3328.
Public comments may be mailed to
Commerce Spectrum Management
Advisory Committee, National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, 1401 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room 4099, Washington,
DC 20230 or emailed to
spectrumadvisory@ntia.doc.gov.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bruce M. Washington, Designated
Federal Officer, at (202) 482–6415 or
BWashington@ntia.doc.gov; and/or visit
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35941
NTIA’s Web site at https://
www.ntia.doc.gov/advisory/spectrum.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The Committee provides
advice to the Assistant Secretary of
Commerce for Communications and
Information on needed reforms to
domestic spectrum policies and
management in order to: license radio
frequencies in a way that maximize
their public benefits; keep wireless
networks open to innovation as
possible; and make wireless services
available to all Americans (See charter,
at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/advisory/
spectrum/csmac_charter.html). This
Committee is subject to the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5
U.S.C. App. 2, and is consistent with the
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration Act, 47
U.S.C. 904(b). The Committee functions
solely as an advisory body in
compliance with the FACA. For more
information about the Committee visit:
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/advisory/
spectrum.
Matters To Be Considered: The
Committee will receive
recommendations from subcommittees
on matters related to the
accomplishment of the President’s tenyear goal of identifying 500 megahertz
of radio spectrum for wireless
broadband. The Sharing, Unlicensed,
and Spectrum Management
Improvements Subcommittees will
report on the status of their
determinations and findings and
facilitate discussion on recommended
next steps. In addition, the Committee
will receive reports from designated
committee members on the progress of
the following five working groups to
repurpose the 1695–1710 MHz and
1755–1850 MHz bands for wireless
broadband:
1. WG1 1695–1710 MHz Weather
Satellite Receive Earth Stations,
2. WG2 1755–1850 MHz Law
Enforcement Surveillance and other
short-range fixed,
3. WG3 1755–1850 MHz Satellite
Control Links and Electronic Warfare,
4. WG4 1755–1850 MHz Fixed Pointto-Point and Tactical Radio Relay, and
5. WG5 1755–1850 MHz Airborne
Operations.
NTIA will post a detailed agenda on
its Web site, https://www.ntia.doc.gov,
prior to the meeting. To the extent that
the meeting time and agenda permit,
any member of the public may speak to
or otherwise address the advisory
committee regarding agenda items.
During the portion of the meeting when
the public may make an oral
presentation, speakers may address only
E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM
15JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 116 (Friday, June 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35939-35941]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14795]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-891]
Hand Trucks From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice of Amended Final
Results
SUMMARY: On June 4, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') issued its mandate in Qingdao Taifa Group
Co. v. United States, 780 F. Supp. 2d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2012), affirming
the Court of International Trade's (``CIT'') or (``Court'') decision in
Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 08-00245,
Slip Op. 11-83 (CIT 2011) sustaining the Department of Commerce's
(``the Department'') final results of its third redetermination
pursuant to the CIT's remand order in Qingdao Taifa Group Co. Ltd. v.
United States, Court No. 08-00245, Slip Op. 10-126 (CIT 2010) (``Remand
III'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant To Court
Remand, Court No. 08-00245, dated March 17, 2011, available at:
https://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/ (``Redetermination
III'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with the decision of the CAFC in Timken Co. v. United
States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), as clarified by
Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed.
Cir. 2010) (``Diamond Sawblades''), the Department is notifying the
public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the
Department's final results and is amending the final results of the
2005-2006 administrative review of hand trucks from the People's
Republic of China (``PRC'') with respect to the margin assigned to
Qingdao Taifa Group Co. Ltd. (``Taifa'') covering the period of review
(``POR'') December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 14, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brooke Kennedy, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
[[Page 35940]]
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482-3818.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Results,\2\ the Department
applied total adverse facts available (``AFA'') to Taifa because we
found that Taifa withheld information that had been requested,
significantly impeded the proceeding and provided information that
could not be verified. Additionally, the Department found evidence at
verification which indicated local government ownership over Taifa, and
contradicted Taifa's submitted questionnaire responses. As such, the
Department determined that Taifa failed to fully explain the ownership
interests in the company and because of this, Taifa failed to
demonstrate entitlement to a separate rate. Accordingly, the Department
applied the PRC-wide rate of 383.60 percent to Taifa for the POR. On
August 11, 2009, the CIT remanded the Final Results to the Department
in Remand I.\3\ The Court sustained the Department's decision to apply
AFA to Taifa, however, the Court remanded the matter to the Department
to determine whether the local government ownership resulted in de
facto control such that the Department could treat Taifa as part of the
PRC-wide entity. Further, the Court held that because the PRC-wide
entity rate presumes government control, the Department is not
permitted to select the PRC-wide rate as the AFA rate without first
making a determination about the presence or absence of de facto
government control over Taifa.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof from the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of 2005-2006 Administrative Review,
73 FR 43684 (July 28, 2008) (``Final Results'').
\3\ See Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v. United States, 637 F.
Supp. 2d 1231, 1244 (CIT 2009) (``Remand I'').
\4\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 22, 2010, the Department issued a hand trucks
redetermination, Redetermination I.\5\ Pursuant to Remand I, we
determined that the record did not contain affirmative evidence that a
government entity exercised de facto control over Taifa, so we granted
Taifa a separate rate and assigned an AFA margin based on a control
number-specific margin from the most recently completed segment of the
proceeding in which Taifa participated as a mandatory respondent.
Specifically, the margin was calculated from Taifa's own reported
information and data from the investigation. The Department's
redetermination resulted in changing Taifa's margin from 383.60 percent
to 227.73 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant To Court
Remand, Court No. 08-00245, dated January 22, 2010,
(``Redetermination I'') available at: https://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 12, 2010, the CIT remanded the matter a second time in
Remand II, finding that the Department had failed to meaningfully
investigate the question of government control.\6\ The CIT declined to
decide whether the 227.73 percent rate provided by the Department was
supported, but required the Department to make a decision supported by
substantial evidence about Taifa's independence from or control by the
Chinese government.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v. United States, 710 F. Supp.
2d 1352, 1357 (CIT 2012) (``Remand II'').
\7\ See id. at 1358.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 27, 2010, the Department issued its second redetermination,
Redetermination II,\8\ in which we found that because the information
provided by Taifa regarding its ownership was unreliable, the
Department was unable to conclude based on substantial evidence that
Taifa was de facto free of government control and thus entitled to a
separate rate. Therefore the Department assigned Taifa the PRC-entity
rate of 383.60 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant To Court
Remand, Court No. 08-00245, dated July 27, 2010, (``Redetermination
II'') available at: https://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CIT ruled on Redetermination II on November 12, 2010, and once
again remanded back to the Department Remand III ordering that we
either explain why substantial record evidence supports a finding of
central government control thereby justifying imposition of the PRC-
wide entity rate, or that we grant Taifa a separate rate ``grounded in
the realities of the industry.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See id., at 1385, 1386.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Remand III, on March 27, 2011, the Department issued
its third redetermination, Redetermination III, this time granting
Taifa a separate rate, concluding after re-weighing the evidence that
there was not substantial record evidence that the central government
controlled Taifa's business decisions.\10\ The Department assigned a
rate of 145.90 percent based on 36 percent of Taifa's total sales by
quantity from the prior segment of the proceeding when Taifa was a
cooperative respondent. The CIT sustained Redetermination III on July
12, 2011, holding that the Department corroborated the rate to the
extent practicable, the rate was not punitive nor so out of touch with
Taifa's practice as to be aberrational, and the Department used a
reasonable methodology to calculate the rate.\11\ After hearing the
issue on appeal, on June 4, 2012, the CAFC affirmed the CIT's July 12,
2011 opinion, sustaining Redetermination III.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant To Court
Remand, Court No. 08-00245, dated March 27, 2011, available at:
https://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/remands/ (``Redetermination
III'').
\11\ Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No.
08-00245, Slip Op. 11-83 (CIT Jul. 12, 2011).
\12\ Qingdao Taifa Group Co. v. United States, 2012 U.S. App.
LEXIS 7281 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 11, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the
CAFC has held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (``the Act''), the Department must publish a notice of
a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a
``conclusive'' court decision. The CAFC's decision sustaining the
Department's remand redetermination with respect to Taifa constitutes a
final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the
Department's Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of
the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department
will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise
pending the expiration of the time for application for a writ of
certiorari, or if a writ of certiorari is granted, pending a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court decision, we are amending the
Final Results to reflect the results of the litigation. The revised
weighted-average dumping margin is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
Exporter margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qingdao Taifa Group Co., Ltd.................................. 145.90
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, if there is no writ of certiorari granted in this
case, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection
to assess antidumping duties on entries of the subject merchandise
exported by Taifa during the POR at 145.90 percent. Additionally,
because Taifa has not participated in any administrative reviews since
the December 1, 2005, through November 30, 2006 administrative review,
Taifa's cash deposit rate will be 145.90 percent, effective June 14,
2012 (i.e., 10 days after the issuance of the CAFC mandate).
[[Page 35941]]
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c)(1), 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 13, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-14795 Filed 6-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
