Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the People's Republic of China and Mexico: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Scope Ruling and Notice of Amended Final Scope Ruling Pursuant to Court Decision, 34899-34900 [2015-15009]

Download as PDF tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Notices or a letter rating as listed by Tire and Rim Association Year Book, and the rated speed does not exceed 81 MPH or an ‘‘M’’ rating; or (ii) the tire’s speed rating molded on the sidewall is 87 MPH or an ‘‘N’’ rating, and in either case the tire’s maximum pressure and maximum load limit are molded on the sidewall and either (1) both exceed the maximum pressure and maximum load limit for any tire of the same size designation in either the passenger car or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book; or (2) if the maximum cold inflation pressure molded on the tire is less than any cold inflation pressure listed for that size designation in either the passenger car or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book, the maximum load limit molded on the tire is higher than the maximum load limit listed at that cold inflation pressure for that size designation in either the passenger car or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book; (7) tires designed and marketed exclusively for off-road use and which, in addition, exhibit each of the following physical characteristics: (a) The size designation and load index combination molded on the tire’s sidewall are listed in the off-the-road, agricultural, industrial or ATV section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book, (b) in addition to any size designation markings, the tire incorporates a warning, prominently molded on the sidewall, that the tire is ‘‘Not For Highway Service’’ or ‘‘Not for Highway Use’’, (c) the tire’s speed rating is molded on the sidewall, indicating the rated speed in MPH or a letter rating as listed by the Tire and Rim Association Year Book, and the rated speed does not exceed 55 MPH or a ‘‘G’’ rating, and (d) the tire features a recognizable off-road tread design. The products covered by the investigation are currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4011.10.10.10, 4011.10.10.20, 4011.10.10.30, 4011.10.10.40, 4011.10.10.50, 4011.10.10.60, 4011.10.10.70, 4011.10.50.00, 4011.20.10.05, and 4011.20.50.10. Tires meeting the scope description may also enter under the following HTSUS subheadings: 4011.99.45.10, 4011.99.45.50, 4011.99.85.10, 4011.99.85.50, 8708.70.45.45, 8708.70.45.60, 8708.70.60.30, 8708.70.60.45, and 8708.70.60.60. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs purposes, the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2015–15058 Filed 6–17–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jun 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–201–837, A–570–954, C–570–955] Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the People’s Republic of China and Mexico: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Scope Ruling and Notice of Amended Final Scope Ruling Pursuant to Court Decision Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 22, 2015, the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) sustained the Final Redetermination issued by the Department of Commerce (Department), in which it determined that Fedmet Resources Corporation’s (Fedmet) Bastion® magnesia alumina carbon bricks (MACBs) are outside the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on certain magnesia carbon bricks (MCBs) from Mexico and the People’s Republic of China (PRC),1 pursuant to the CIT’s remand order in Fedmet Resources Corporation v. United States, Court No. 12–00215 (CIT February 23, 2015).2 Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken,3 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,4 the Department is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Scope Ruling on Bastion® MACBs 5 and is amending its final scope ruling. DATES: Effective Date: June 1, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Huston, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4261. AGENCY: 1 See Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from Mexico and the People’s Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Orders, 75 FR 57257 (September 20, 2010) and Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People’s Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order, 75 FR 57442 (September 21, 2010) (Orders). 2 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People’s Republic of China and Mexico, Fedmet Resources Corporation v. United States, Court No. 12–00215 (March 24, 2015) (Final Redetermination). 3 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 4 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades). 5 See ‘‘Memorandum from Barbara E. Tillman, ‘‘Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the People’s Republic of China and Mexico: Final Scope RulingFedmet Resources Corporation’’ dated July 2, 2012 (Final Scope Ruling) at 2. PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 34899 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 3, 2011, Fedmet filed a request for a scope ruling claiming that its Bastion® MACBs are outside the scope of the Orders. The Department issued its Final Scope Ruling on July 2, 2012, and found that Fedmet’s Bastion® MACBs are included in the scope of the Orders. Fedmet challenged the Department’s Final Scope Ruling before the CIT. On May 30, 2013, the CIT sustained the Department’s analysis pursuant to 19 CFR 351.225(k)(1) and (k)(2).6 Fedmet appealed the CIT’s judgment to the CAFC. On June 20, 2014, in a divided decision, the CAFC reversed the CIT.7 The CAFC held that the references to ‘‘MACBs’’ in the (k)(1) sources resolved the inquiry and that the scope of the Orders did not extend to MACBs.8 On February 23, 2015, the Department issued its Final Redetermination and found that, pursuant to the CAFC’s decision and the CIT’s subsequent remand order, Bastion® MACBs imported by Fedmet were not subject to the Orders. The CIT sustained the Final Redetermination on May 22, 2015.9 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 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 May 22, 2015, judgment in this case constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Scope Ruling. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue suspension of liquidation of Bastion® MACBs imported by Fedmet pending expiration of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision. Amended Final Scope Ruling Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this case, the Department is amending the Final Scope Ruling and finds Fedmet’s 6 See Fedmet Res. Corp. v. United States, 911 F. Supp. 2d 1348 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2013). 7 See Fedmet Res. Corp. v. United States, 755 F.3d 912, 923 (CAFC 2014). 8 Id. at 917. 9 See Fedmet Res. Corp. v. United States, Court No. 12–00215 (CIT May 22, 2015) (judgment sustaining Final Redetermination). E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM 18JNN1 34900 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 117 / Thursday, June 18, 2015 / Notices Bastion® MACBs to be outside the scope of the Orders. The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that the cash deposit rate will be zero percent for Fedmet’s Bastion® MACBs. In the event that the CIT’s ruling is not appealed, or if appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate entries of Fedmet’s Bastion® MACBs without regard to antidumping and/or countervailing duties, and to lift suspension of liquidation of such entries. Notification to Interested Parties This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: June 11, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2015–15009 Filed 6–17–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P implementing the Certification are at 15 CFR part 995. The recordkeeping and reporting requirements of 15 CFR part 995 form the basis for this collection of information. This information allows the Office of Coast Survey to administer the regulation, and to better understand the marketplace resulting in products to that meet the needs of the customer in a timely and efficient manner. Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; not-for-profit institutions. Frequency: Semiannually and on occasion. Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. This information collection request may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to OIRA_Submission@ omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806. Dated: June 15, 2015. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [FR Doc. 2015–14981 Filed 6–17–15; 8:45 am] tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request BILLING CODE 3520–JE–P The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Title: Certification Requirements for Distributors of NOAA Electronic Navigational Charts. OMB Control Number: 0648–0508. Form Number(s): None. Type of Request: Regular (extension of a currently approved information collection). Number of Respondents: 8. Average Hours per Response: Distribution report, 1 hour; error reporting, 1.5 hours. Burden Hours: 328. Needs and Uses: This request is for extension of a currently approved information collection. NOS Office of Coast Survey manages the Certification Requirements for Distributors of NOAA Electronic Navigational Charts (NOAA ENCs®). The certification allows entities to download, redistribute, repackage, or in some cases reformat, official NOAA ENCs and retain the NOAA ENC’s official status. The regulations for DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:53 Jun 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Prize Purchases Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC). ACTION: Notice of prize purchase. AGENCY: This notice sets forth the intention of the Communication and Education (CommEd) Division of CPO to purchase and distribute prizes (1 t-shirt and 1 mug per month) to the monthly winners of the Climate Challenge—the social media game with a purpose. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Social Media Game with a purpose was developed for several reasons: 1. To help improve public climate literacy (which is a Climate.gov requirement). 2. To engage Climate.gov’s publics in a fun & challenging way, while also growing our readership (another req). 3. To test the hypothesis that there is ‘‘wisdom in the crowd’’ by comparing the crowd’s averaged best guesses to experts’ best guesses as well as realworld observations. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 4. If we find evidence that there is indeed wisdom in the crowd, then that begs consideration of a next step: development of approaches for leveraging and focusing the crowd’s wisdom in decision-making contexts for societal benefit. Climate Challenge allows players to guess future climate-related conditions, such as the annual Arctic Sea Ice minimum coverage or a monthly average global surface temperature. The game also allows players to compare their answers to the experts’ and, when available, see how both predictions compare to real-world measurements. There will be one climate-related question per month, and whoever comes closest to guessing the actual values will be that month’s winner. For an added twist, participants can also compete against their friends, colleagues, or family members. Climate Challenge also helps to build climate science literacy by encouraging players to explore online links to materials related to the topics addressed by each game question. Players who want to increase their chances of winning are encouraged to visit the links to gather information that may help them improve the accuracy of their guesses. NOAA’s Climate.gov team will publish the real-world measurements once they become available, as well as short summaries of the methods that the experts used to make their guesses. Matters To Be Considered: Prizes will be distributed monthly. The prizes that will be given to each winner (one per month) are a black TShirt with the Climate Challenge Logo on the front and a mug consisting of the same logo as the t-shirt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Herring, Division Chief, Communication and Education Division, CPO, NOAA, Rm. 12104, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910. (Phone: 301–734– 1207, Fax: 301–713–0517, Email: David.Herring@noaa.gov). Please feel free to visit the Climate Challenge Web site using the following link: www.ecoresearch.net/climate-challenge. Dated: June 3, 2015. Jason Donaldson, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Administrative Officer, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [FR Doc. 2015–14730 Filed 6–17–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM 18JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 117 (Thursday, June 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34899-34900]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15009]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-837, A-570-954, C-570-955]


Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the People's Republic of 
China and Mexico: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final 
Scope Ruling and Notice of Amended Final Scope Ruling Pursuant to Court 
Decision

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

SUMMARY: On May 22, 2015, the United States Court of International 
Trade (CIT) sustained the Final Redetermination issued by the 
Department of Commerce (Department), in which it determined that Fedmet 
Resources Corporation's (Fedmet) Bastion[supreg] magnesia alumina 
carbon bricks (MACBs) are outside the scope of the antidumping and 
countervailing duty orders on certain magnesia carbon bricks (MCBs) 
from Mexico and the People's Republic of China (PRC),\1\ pursuant to 
the CIT's remand order in Fedmet Resources Corporation v. United 
States, Court No. 12-00215 (CIT February 23, 2015).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from Mexico and the 
People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Orders, 75 FR 57257 
(September 20, 2010) and Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the 
People's Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order, 75 FR 57442 
(September 21, 2010) (Orders).
    \2\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand Magnesia Carbon Bricks from the People's Republic of China 
and Mexico, Fedmet Resources Corporation v. United States, Court No. 
12-00215 (March 24, 2015) (Final Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken,\3\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\4\ the Department is notifying the public that the final 
judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's Final 
Scope Ruling on Bastion[supreg] MACBs \5\ and is amending its final 
scope ruling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \4\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
    \5\ See ``Memorandum from Barbara E. Tillman, ``Certain Magnesia 
Carbon Bricks From the People's Republic of China and Mexico: Final 
Scope Ruling- Fedmet Resources Corporation'' dated July 2, 2012 
(Final Scope Ruling) at 2.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: June 1, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Huston, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4261.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On May 3, 2011, Fedmet filed a request for a scope ruling claiming 
that its Bastion[supreg] MACBs are outside the scope of the Orders. The 
Department issued its Final Scope Ruling on July 2, 2012, and found 
that Fedmet's Bastion[supreg] MACBs are included in the scope of the 
Orders.
    Fedmet challenged the Department's Final Scope Ruling before the 
CIT. On May 30, 2013, the CIT sustained the Department's analysis 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.225(k)(1) and (k)(2).\6\ Fedmet appealed the 
CIT's judgment to the CAFC. On June 20, 2014, in a divided decision, 
the CAFC reversed the CIT.\7\ The CAFC held that the references to 
``MACBs'' in the (k)(1) sources resolved the inquiry and that the scope 
of the Orders did not extend to MACBs.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Fedmet Res. Corp. v. United States, 911 F. Supp. 2d 1348 
(Ct. Int'l Trade 2013).
    \7\ See Fedmet Res. Corp. v. United States, 755 F.3d 912, 923 
(CAFC 2014).
    \8\ Id. at 917.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 23, 2015, the Department issued its Final 
Redetermination and found that, pursuant to the CAFC's decision and the 
CIT's subsequent remand order, Bastion[supreg] MACBs imported by Fedmet 
were not subject to the Orders. The CIT sustained the Final 
Redetermination on May 22, 2015.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Fedmet Res. Corp. v. United States, Court No. 12-00215 
(CIT May 22, 2015) (judgment sustaining Final Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 
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 May 22, 2015, judgment in this 
case constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony 
with the Department's Final Scope Ruling. This notice is published in 
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the 
Department will continue suspension of liquidation of Bastion[supreg] 
MACBs imported by Fedmet pending expiration of the period of appeal or, 
if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision.

Amended Final Scope Ruling

    Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this 
case, the Department is amending the Final Scope Ruling and finds 
Fedmet's

[[Page 34900]]

Bastion[supreg] MACBs to be outside the scope of the Orders. The 
Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that 
the cash deposit rate will be zero percent for Fedmet's Bastion[supreg] 
MACBs. In the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or if 
appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct CBP to 
liquidate entries of Fedmet's Bastion[supreg] MACBs without regard to 
antidumping and/or countervailing duties, and to lift suspension of 
liquidation of such entries.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(e)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: June 11, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-15009 Filed 6-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.