Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Sunset Review, Notice of Rescission of Sunset Review, and Advance Notification of New Sunset Review, 63080-63081 [2014-25206]

Download as PDF 63080 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 204 / Wednesday, October 22, 2014 / Notices On May 5, 2014, the Court issued a remand order to the Department regarding the assignment of the 76.53 percent PRC-wide rate to Kehuaxing, which resulted from the Department’s rejection of Kehuaxing’s untimely filed quantity and value questionnaire response, and the Department’s subsequent rejection of Kehuaxing’s separate rate application.3 Pursuant to the Court’s directive in the Remand Order, we requested and Kehuaxing timely provided these submissions for the record. We conducted a separate rate analysis and found that Kehuaxing demonstrated the absence of both de jure and de facto government control over its export activities and is thus eligible for a separate rate.4 Timken Notice In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) 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 June 27, 2014 judgment in this case constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Determination. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Amended Final Determination Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this case, the Department is amending the Final Determination with respect to Kehuaxing’s weighted-average dumping margin, effective July 7, 2014. The revised weighted-average dumping margin is as follows: Exporter Producer Percent margin Shenzen Kehuaxing Industrial Ltd ............................................ Shenzen Kehuaxing Industrial Ltd ........................................... 33.51% Because no party appealed the CIT’s decision before the period of appeal expired on August 26, 2014, the CIT’s decision is now final and conclusive. Accordingly, the Department will instruct CBP to collect cash deposits for entries of subject merchandise exported and produced by Kehuaxing equal to the weighted-average dumping margin listed above, effective July 7, 2014, adjusted, where appropriate, for export subsidies and domestic subsidy passthrough offsets. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 14, 2014. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2014–25209 Filed 10–21–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Sunset Review, Notice of Rescission of Sunset Review, and Advance Notification of New Sunset Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: 3 See Artisan Mfg. Corp. v. United States, 978 F. Supp. 2d 1334 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2014) (‘‘Remand Order’’). 4 See Final Results Of Redetermination Pursuant To Court Remand, Artisan Manufacturing Corp. v. United States, Court No. 13–00169; Slip Op. 14–52 (CIT 2014), dated June 4, 2014, available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/index.html. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Oct 21, 2014 Jkt 235001 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; Telephone: (202) 482–4136. Background Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (the Department) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 of the Act would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury. In December 2013, the Department initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from the People’s Republic of China five years from the imposition of the order in January 2009.1 On July 11, 2014, The Department published the 2014 Sunset Review.2 Notwithstanding the holding of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) that ‘‘the statutory scheme impose{d} a mandatory duty on Commerce to issue antidumping duty orders covering the subject entries’’ as of January 2009,3 the 1 See Initiation of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 78 FR 72061 (December 2, 2013) (Initiation Notice). 2 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 79 FR 40062 (July 11, 2014) (2014 Sunset Review). PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) held, on September 23, 2014, that the 2014 Sunset Review was unlawful and premature, agreeing with the plaintiff that the five-year period should have been counted from November 2009. Thus, the CIT ordered the Department to rescind the 2014 Sunset Review and to re-initiate the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from the People’s Republic of China on November 4, 2014.4 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, the Department is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department’s 2014 Sunset Review. The Department is therefore rescinding the 2014 Sunset Review. Timken Notice In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC has held that, pursuant to section 516A(c)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 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 September 23, 2014, judgment constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Department’s 2014 Sunset Review. This 3 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374, 1382–1383 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades). 4 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13–00391, slip op. 2014–111, 2014 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 112 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sep. 23, 2014) (Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition). E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM 22OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 204 / Wednesday, October 22, 2014 / Notices notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. The effective date of this Timken notice is October 3, 2014. Rescission of the 2014 Sunset Review Pursuant to the CIT order in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition, we are hereby rescinding the 2014 Sunset Review, effective September 23, 2014. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Upcoming Sunset Review for November 2014 Pursuant to the CIT Order Pursuant to the CIT order in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition, the first sunset review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from the People’s Republic of China is now scheduled for initiation on November 4, 2014 and will appear in a notice of Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review (Notice of Initiation). The Department’s procedures for the conduct of a sunset review are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. The Notice of Initiation provides further information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in the sunset review. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and make available a service list for this sunset review. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list, it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to this sunset review contact the Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation. If the Department receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of initiation, the sunset review will continue. Thereafter, any interested party wishing to participate in the sunset review must provide substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later than 30 days after the date of initiation. We are publishing this notice pursuant to the CIT order in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition for the rescission of the 2014 Sunset Review and as a service to the international trading community for the advance notification of the re-initiation of the sunset review. The advanced notification of a sunset review is not required by statute. Dated: October 16, 2014. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2014–25206 Filed 10–21–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:22 Oct 21, 2014 Jkt 235001 63081 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Scope of the Order International Trade Administration The merchandise subject to the order is SSB. The SSB subject to the order is currently classifiable under subheadings 7222.10.00, 7222.11.00, 7222.19.00, 7222.20.00, 7222.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes.4 The written description is dispositive. [A–469–805] Stainless Steel Bar From Spain: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel bar (SSB) from Spain. The period of review (POR) is March 1, 2012, through February 28, 2013. The review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, Gerdau Aceros Especiales Europa, S.L. (Gerdau).1 We determine that subject merchandise has not been sold at less than normal value during the POR. DATES: Effective Date: October 22, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1690. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On April 23, 2014, the Department published the Preliminary Results and invited interested parties to comment.2 Carpenter Technology Corporation, Crucible Industries LLC, Universal Stainless & Alloy Products Inc., and Valbruna Slater Stainless, Inc. (collectively, the petitioners) filed a case brief on May 30, 2014. Gerdau filed a rebuttal brief on June 4, 2014. The deadline for the final results of this review was August 21, 2014. On July 16, 2014, we extended the deadline for the final results to October 20, 2014.3 1 We determine that Gerdau is the successor-ininterest to Sidenor Industrial S.L. For further discussion, see the memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Stainless Steel Bar from Spain; 2012–2013’’ dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 2 See Stainless Steel Bar From Spain: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013, 79 FR 22622 (April 23, 2014) (Preliminary Results). 3 See memorandum from Sandra Dreisonstok, International Trade Compliance Analyst, to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Stainless Steel Bar from Spain: Extension of PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as an appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). Access to IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/ index.html. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of the comments received, we did not make any revisions to the margin calculations for Gerdau. Final Results of Review As a result of this review, we determine that a weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00 percent exists for Gerdau for the period March 1, 2012, through February 28, 2013. Disclosure We intend to disclose the calculations performed to parties in this proceeding within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013’’ dated July 16, 2014. In this memorandum, we inadvertently calculated an extended deadline of October 14, 2014 (60 days from the date of signature) instead of October 20, 2014 (60 days from the date of publication). See September 10, 2014, memorandum to the file from Sandra Dreisonstok, International Trade Compliance Analyst, clarifying this error. 4 A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Preliminary Results, and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM 22OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63080-63081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25206]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of 
China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of 
Sunset Review, Notice of Rescission of Sunset Review, and Advance 
Notification of New Sunset Review

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger, AD/CVD Operations, 
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; Telephone: (202) 482-4136.

Background

    Every five years, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and 
conduct a review to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or 
antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended 
under section 704 or 734 of the Act would be likely to lead to 
continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as 
the case may be) and of material injury.
    In December 2013, the Department initiated a sunset review of the 
antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from the 
People's Republic of China five years from the imposition of the order 
in January 2009.\1\ On July 11, 2014, The Department published the 2014 
Sunset Review.\2\ Notwithstanding the holding of the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) that ``the statutory 
scheme impose{d{time}  a mandatory duty on Commerce to issue 
antidumping duty orders covering the subject entries'' as of January 
2009,\3\ the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) held, on September 
23, 2014, that the 2014 Sunset Review was unlawful and premature, 
agreeing with the plaintiff that the five-year period should have been 
counted from November 2009. Thus, the CIT ordered the Department to 
rescind the 2014 Sunset Review and to re-initiate the sunset review of 
the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from 
the People's Republic of China on November 4, 2014.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Initiation of Five-year (``Sunset'') Review, 78 FR 72061 
(December 2, 2013) (Initiation Notice).
    \2\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Review of 
the Antidumping Duty Order, 79 FR 40062 (July 11, 2014) (2014 Sunset 
Review).
    \3\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F.3d 1374, 1382-1383 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
    \4\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United 
States, Court No. 13-00391, slip op. 2014-111, 2014 Ct. Intl. Trade 
LEXIS 112 (Ct. Int'l Trade Sep. 23, 2014) (Diamond Sawblades 
Manufacturers' Coalition).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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, the Department is notifying the public that the final 
judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's 2014 
Sunset Review. The Department is therefore rescinding the 2014 Sunset 
Review.

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades, the CAFC has held that, pursuant to section 516A(c)(1) of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 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 September 23, 2014, judgment 
constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with 
the Department's 2014 Sunset Review. This

[[Page 63081]]

notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of 
Timken. The effective date of this Timken notice is October 3, 2014.

Rescission of the 2014 Sunset Review

    Pursuant to the CIT order in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' 
Coalition, we are hereby rescinding the 2014 Sunset Review, effective 
September 23, 2014.

Upcoming Sunset Review for November 2014 Pursuant to the CIT Order

    Pursuant to the CIT order in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' 
Coalition, the first sunset review of the antidumping duty order on 
diamond sawblades and parts thereof from the People's Republic of China 
is now scheduled for initiation on November 4, 2014 and will appear in 
a notice of Initiation of Five-Year (``Sunset'') Review (Notice of 
Initiation).
    The Department's procedures for the conduct of a sunset review are 
set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. The Notice of Initiation provides further 
information regarding what is required of all parties to participate in 
the sunset review.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the Department will maintain and 
make available a service list for this sunset review. To facilitate the 
timely preparation of the service list, it is requested that those 
seeking recognition as interested parties to this sunset review contact 
the Department in writing within 10 days of the publication of the 
Notice of Initiation.
    If the Department receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a 
member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of 
initiation, the sunset review will continue. Thereafter, any interested 
party wishing to participate in the sunset review must provide 
substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later 
than 30 days after the date of initiation.
    We are publishing this notice pursuant to the CIT order in Diamond 
Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition for the rescission of the 2014 
Sunset Review and as a service to the international trading community 
for the advance notification of the re-initiation of the sunset review. 
The advanced notification of a sunset review is not required by 
statute.

    Dated: October 16, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-25206 Filed 10-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P