Tapered Roller Bearings from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Administrative Review, 58996-58997 [2013-23390]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
58996
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 25, 2013 / Notices
that is subject to the Regulations, or in
any other activity subject to the
Regulations.
II. No person may, directly or
indirectly, do any of the following:
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf
of the Denied Person any item subject to
the Regulations;
B. Take any action that facilitates the
acquisition or attempted acquisition by
the Denied Person of the ownership,
possession, or control of any item
subject to the Regulations that has been
or will be exported from the United
States, including financing or other
support activities related to a
transaction whereby the Denied Person
acquires or attempts to acquire such
ownership, possession or control;
C. Take any action to acquire from or
to facilitate the acquisition or attempted
acquisition from the Denied Person of
any item subject to the Regulations that
has been exported from the United
States;
D. Obtain from the Denied Person in
the United States any item subject to the
Regulations with knowledge or reason
to know that the item will be, or is
intended to be, exported from the
United States; or
E. Engage in any transaction to service
any item subject to the Regulations that
has been or will be exported from the
United States and which is owned,
possessed or controlled by the Denied
Person, or service any item, of whatever
origin, that is owned, possessed or
controlled by the Denied Person if such
service involves the use of any item
subject to the Regulations that has been
or will be exported from the United
States. For purposes of this paragraph,
servicing means installation,
maintenance, repair, modification or
testing.
III. After notice and opportunity for
comment as provided in Section 766.23
of the Regulations, any other person,
firm, corporation, or business
organization related to Kazerani by
affiliation, ownership, control or
position of responsibility in the conduct
of trade or related services may also be
subject to the provisions of this Order if
necessary to prevent evasion of the
Order.
IV. This Order does not prohibit any
export, reexport, or other transaction
subject to the Regulations where the
only items involved that are subject to
the Regulations are the foreignproduced direct product of U.S.-origin
technology.
V. This Order is effective immediately
and shall remain in effect until January
30, 2018.
VI. In accordance with Part 756 of the
Regulations, Kazerani may file an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:20 Sep 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
appeal of this Order with the Under
Secretary of Commerce for Industry and
Security. The appeal must be filed
within 45 days from the date of this
Order and must comply with the
provisions of Part 756 of the
Regulations.
VII. A copy of this Order shall be
delivered to the Kazerani. This Order
shall be published in the Federal
Register.
Issued this 19th day of September 2013.
Bernard Kritzer,
Director, Office of Exporter Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–23306 Filed 9–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–601]
Tapered Roller Bearings from the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With
Final Results of Administrative Review
and Notice of Amended Final Results
of Administrative Review
International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 30, 2013, the
United States Court of International
Trade (‘‘CIT’’ or ‘‘Court’’) sustained the
Department of Commerce’s
(‘‘Department’’) final results of the
second remand redetermination 1
relating to the twentieth administrative
review of the antidumping duty order
on tapered roller bearings from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), in
Peer Bearing Company—Changshan v.
United States, Court No. 09–00052, Slip.
Op. 13–116 (CIT 2013) (‘‘CPZ III’’).
Consistent with the decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (‘‘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 CIT judgment in this case is not
in harmony with the Department’s final
results and is amending its final results
of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on tapered
roller bearings from the PRC covering
the period of review (‘‘POR’’) of June 1,
2006, through May 31, 2007, with
respect to the weighted-average
AGENCY:
1 See
Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Court No. 09–00052, Slip Op. 12–
102, dated October 2, 2012 (‘‘CPZ II Remand
Redetermination’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
dumping margin assigned to Peer
Bearing Company—Changshan (‘‘CPZ’’).
DATES: Effective Date: September 9,
2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brendan Quinn, Office 8, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–5848.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Subsequent to the publication of the
Final Results 2 on January 22, 2009, CPZ
filed a complaint with the CIT to
challenge various aspects of the Final
Results.
On January 28, 2011, in Peer Bearing
Company—Changshan v. United States,
752 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (CIT 2011) (‘‘CPZ
I’’), the Court remanded the Final
Results and ordered that the
Department: a) re-determine CPZ’s
margin using U.S. prices calculated in a
manner that complies with the law,
either by employing the constructed
export price (‘‘CEP’’) methodology using
price and transaction data available on
the administrative record or re-opening
the record to obtain export price (‘‘EP’’)
information; and b) review, reconsider,
and re-determine surrogate values
(‘‘SVs’’) for alloy steel wire rod, alloy
steel bar, and scrap from the production
of cages, used to calculate CPZ’s factors
of production.
In response to CPZ I, the Department
issued the Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Remand,
Court No. 09–00052, Slip Op. 11–11
(CIT 2011) on July 1, 2011 (‘‘CPZ I
Remand Redetermination’’). In the CPZ
I Remand Redetermination, the
Department determined: 1) that CPZ’s
dumping margin should be calculated
on an EP basis; 2) that CPZ was
unresponsive to the Department’s
requests for EP information; and 3) to
apply total adverse facts available
(‘‘AFA’’) to CPZ. As a result of the
determination to apply total AFA to
CPZ, the Department did not reach any
determination regarding SV issues
remanded by the Court in CPZ I.
On August 2, 2012, in Peer Bearing
Company—Changshan v. United States,
Court No. 09–00052, Slip Op. 12–102
(CIT 2012) (‘‘CPZ II’’), the Court
remanded the CPZ I Remand
Redetermination to the Department. In
2 Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof,
Finished and Unfinished, From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 3987 (January
22, 2009) (‘‘Final Results’’).
E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM
25SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 25, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
CPZ II, the Court held that the
Department acted unlawfully by using
an adverse inference in re-determining
CPZ’s dumping margin, and acted
unlawfully by failing to recalculate the
SVs. The Court ordered the Department
to: 1) Determine the U.S. price for CPZ’s
sales of subject merchandise according
to a lawful method; and 2) review,
reconsider, and re-determine the SVs.
In response to CPZ II, the Department
issued the CPZ II Remand
Redetermination on October 2, 2012. In
the CPZ II Remand Redetermination, the
Department: 1) Applied non-AFA by
calculating CPZ’s margin utilizing the
CEP U.S. price methodology based on
sales information available on the
record of the underlying review; and 2)
re-determined the SVs based on
alternative SV information on the
record.
On August 31, 2013, the Court
sustained the CPZ II Remand
Redetermination, holding that: 1) There
was no error in the Department’s
decision to use the record CEP data
instead of entered value data to
determine the U.S. prices of CPZ’s
subject merchandise, as had been
argued during the remand proceeding;
and 2) the re-determined SVs comply
with the remand order issued in CPZ I.3
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC 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 CIT’s
August 30, 2013, judgment in this case
constitutes a final decision of that court
that is not in harmony with the
Department’s final results of the
administrative review. 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
expiration of the period of appeal or, if
appealed, pending a final and
conclusive court decision. The cash
deposit rate will remain the companyspecific rate established for the most
recently completed segment of this
proceeding in which the respondent
was included.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
decision with respect to this case, the
3 See
CPZ III, Slip Op. 13–116 at 5–9.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:20 Sep 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
58997
Department is amending its Final
Results with respect to CPZ’s weightedaverage dumping margin for the period
June 1, 2006 through May 31, 2007. The
revised weighted-average dumping
margin is as follows:
Chemical Corporation (‘‘Petitioners’’).1
Petitioners are domestic producers of
chlorinated isos. On September 4, 2013,
Petitioners provided a supplement to
the foreign market research report
provided in the Petition.2 The
Department requested additional
information and clarification of certain
TRBS FROM THE PRC
areas of the Petition on September 4,
Weighted2013 and September 5, 2013.3
average
Petitioners filed their response to these
Exporter
margin
requests on September 9, 2013.4
(percent)
Petitioners also submitted additional
information regarding the foreign
Peer Bearing Company—
Changshan (CPZ) .............
6.25 market research report on September 9,
2013.5 On September 10, 2013,
Department officials held a telephone
In the event that the CIT’s ruling is
conference call with the source of the
not appealed, or if appealed, upheld by
home market pricing information to
the CAFC, the Department will instruct
Customs and Border Protection to assess confirm the information provided.6
Additionally, on September 10, 2013,
antidumping duties on entries of the
Department officials held a telephone
subject merchandise exported by CPZ
conference call with Petitioners
during the POR.
This notice is issued and published in regarding the Supplement to the AD/
CVD Petitions.7 On September 10, 2013,
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
Petitioners resubmitted Exhibit AD–26
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
of the Petition.8
Dated: September 18, 2013.
In accordance with section 732(b) of
Paul Piquado,
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Assistant Secretary for Import
‘‘Act’’), Petitioners allege that imports of
Administration.
chlorinated isos from Japan are being, or
[FR Doc. 2013–23390 Filed 9–24–13; 8:45 am]
are likely to be, sold in the United States
at less than fair value within the
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
meaning of section 731 of the Act and
that such imports are materially
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
injuring, or threatening material injury
to, an industry in the United States.
International Trade Administration
Also, consistent with section 732(b)(1)
of the Act, the Petition is accompanied
[A–588–870]
by information reasonably available to
Petitioners supporting their allegations.
Chlorinated Isocyanurates From
The Department finds that Petitioners
Japan: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
filed this Petition on behalf of the
Investigation
domestic industry because they are
interested parties as defined in section
AGENCY: Import Administration,
771(9)(C) of the Act and have
International Trade Administration,
demonstrated sufficient industry
Department of Commerce.
support with respect to the initiation of
DATES: Effective Date: September 25,
the AD investigation that they are
2013.
requesting. See the ‘‘Determination of
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia
1 See Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping
Hancock or Jerry Huang at (202) 482–
Duties on Chlorinated Isocyanurates from Japan,
1394 or (202) 482–4047, respectively,
dated August 29, 2013 (‘‘Petition’’).
AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import
2 See First Supplement to the AD Petition, dated
Administration, International Trade
September 4, 2013 (‘‘First Supplement’’).
3 See Department’s General Supplemental
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Questionnaire issued on September 4, 2013 and
Department’s AD/CVD Supplemental Questionnaire
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.
issued on September 5, 2013.
4 See Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On August 29, 2013, the Department
of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’)
received an antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’)
petition concerning imports of
chlorinated isocyanurates (‘‘chlorinated
isos’’) from Japan, filed in proper form
by Clearon Corp. and Occidental
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
September 9, 2013 (‘‘Supplement to the AD/CVD
Petitions’’).
5 See Second Supplement to the AD Petition,
dated September 9, 2013 (‘‘Second Supplement’’).
6 See Memorandum to the File from Julia
Hancock, dated September 11, 2013.
7 See Memorandum to the File from Jerry Huang,
dated September 11, 2013.
8 See Amended Supplement to the AD Petition,
dated September 10, 2013 (‘‘Amended
Supplement’’).
E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM
25SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58996-58997]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23390]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-601]
Tapered Roller Bearings from the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of
Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review
AGENCY: International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 30, 2013, the United States Court of International
Trade (``CIT'' or ``Court'') sustained the Department of Commerce's
(``Department'') final results of the second remand redetermination \1\
relating to the twentieth administrative review of the antidumping duty
order on tapered roller bearings from the People's Republic of China
(``PRC''), in Peer Bearing Company--Changshan v. United States, Court
No. 09-00052, Slip. Op. 13-116 (CIT 2013) (``CPZ III''). Consistent
with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit (``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 CIT
judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's final
results and is amending its final results of the administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from the PRC
covering the period of review (``POR'') of June 1, 2006, through May
31, 2007, with respect to the weighted-average dumping margin assigned
to Peer Bearing Company--Changshan (``CPZ'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Court No. 09-00052, Slip Op. 12-102, dated October 2, 2012
(``CPZ II Remand Redetermination'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: September 9, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brendan Quinn, Office 8, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5848.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Subsequent to the publication of the Final Results \2\ on January
22, 2009, CPZ filed a complaint with the CIT to challenge various
aspects of the Final Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 3987 (January 22,
2009) (``Final Results'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 28, 2011, in Peer Bearing Company--Changshan v. United
States, 752 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (CIT 2011) (``CPZ I''), the Court remanded
the Final Results and ordered that the Department: a) re-determine
CPZ's margin using U.S. prices calculated in a manner that complies
with the law, either by employing the constructed export price
(``CEP'') methodology using price and transaction data available on the
administrative record or re-opening the record to obtain export price
(``EP'') information; and b) review, reconsider, and re-determine
surrogate values (``SVs'') for alloy steel wire rod, alloy steel bar,
and scrap from the production of cages, used to calculate CPZ's factors
of production.
In response to CPZ I, the Department issued the Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, Court No. 09-00052, Slip Op. 11-11
(CIT 2011) on July 1, 2011 (``CPZ I Remand Redetermination''). In the
CPZ I Remand Redetermination, the Department determined: 1) that CPZ's
dumping margin should be calculated on an EP basis; 2) that CPZ was
unresponsive to the Department's requests for EP information; and 3) to
apply total adverse facts available (``AFA'') to CPZ. As a result of
the determination to apply total AFA to CPZ, the Department did not
reach any determination regarding SV issues remanded by the Court in
CPZ I.
On August 2, 2012, in Peer Bearing Company--Changshan v. United
States, Court No. 09-00052, Slip Op. 12-102 (CIT 2012) (``CPZ II''),
the Court remanded the CPZ I Remand Redetermination to the Department.
In
[[Page 58997]]
CPZ II, the Court held that the Department acted unlawfully by using an
adverse inference in re-determining CPZ's dumping margin, and acted
unlawfully by failing to recalculate the SVs. The Court ordered the
Department to: 1) Determine the U.S. price for CPZ's sales of subject
merchandise according to a lawful method; and 2) review, reconsider,
and re-determine the SVs.
In response to CPZ II, the Department issued the CPZ II Remand
Redetermination on October 2, 2012. In the CPZ II Remand
Redetermination, the Department: 1) Applied non-AFA by calculating
CPZ's margin utilizing the CEP U.S. price methodology based on sales
information available on the record of the underlying review; and 2)
re-determined the SVs based on alternative SV information on the
record.
On August 31, 2013, the Court sustained the CPZ II Remand
Redetermination, holding that: 1) There was no error in the
Department's decision to use the record CEP data instead of entered
value data to determine the U.S. prices of CPZ's subject merchandise,
as had been argued during the remand proceeding; and 2) the re-
determined SVs comply with the remand order issued in CPZ I.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See CPZ III, Slip Op. 13-116 at 5-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the
CAFC 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 CIT's August 30, 2013, judgment in
this case constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in
harmony with the Department's final results of the administrative
review. 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 expiration
of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive
court decision. The cash deposit rate will remain the company-specific
rate established for the most recently completed segment of this
proceeding in which the respondent was included.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this
case, the Department is amending its Final Results with respect to
CPZ's weighted-average dumping margin for the period June 1, 2006
through May 31, 2007. The revised weighted-average dumping margin is as
follows:
TRBs From the PRC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peer Bearing Company--Changshan (CPZ)................... 6.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or if appealed,
upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct Customs and Border
Protection to assess antidumping duties on entries of the subject
merchandise exported by CPZ during the POR.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: September 18, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-23390 Filed 9-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
