Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty New Shipper Review; 2014-2016, 36262-36263 [2016-13204]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
36262
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 108 / Monday, June 6, 2016 / Notices
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone
(202) 482–5760 or (202) 482–1690,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 24, 2014, the Department
published the AR3 Final Results, in
which we assigned the PRC-wide rate of
164.09 percent to companies including
the ATM Single Entity that comprise the
PRC-wide entity.4 The ATM Single
Entity challenged our decision to treat it
as part of the PRC-wide entity and
assign the PRC-wide rate to it. On
November 9, 2015, the Court remanded
the AR3 Final Results to the Department
to reconsider the PRC-wide rate in light
of the remand redeterminations for the
two previous reviews that the
Department issued after the publication
of the AR3 Final Results.5 In these two
remand redeterminations, the
Department found that the ATM Single
Entity was not entitled to a separate rate
and, therefore, was part of the PRC-wide
entity, and revised the PRC-wide rate
using the simple average of the margins
that had been calculated for the ATM
Single Entity in the underlying
administrative reviews and the petition
rate in the less-than-fair-value
investigation, i.e., 164.09 percent.6 On
remand for the third administrative
review, the Department revised the PRCwide rate consistent with the
immediately preceding administrative
review, i.e., the second administrative
review.7 On May 11, 2016, the Court
4 See
AR3 Final Results, 79 FR at 35724, n.7.
Gang Yan Diamond Products, Inc. v. United
States, Court No. 14–00148, slip op. 15–127 (Ct.
Int’l Trade Nov. 9, 2015).
6 See Final Results of Redetermination pursuant
to Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition v.
United States, Court No. 13–00078, slip op. 14–50
(Ct. Int’l Trade Apr. 29, 2014), dated April 10, 2015,
and available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/
remands/14-50.pdf, aff’d, Diamond Sawblades
Manufacturers’ Coalition v. United States, Court
No. 13–00078, slip op. 15–105 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept.
23, 2015), and Final Remand Redetermination
pursuant to Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13–00241, slip
op. 14–112 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept. 23, 2014), dated
May 18, 2015, and available at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/remands/14-112.pdf, aff’d,
Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition v.
United States, Court No. 13–00241, slip op. 15–116
(Ct. Int’l Trade Oct. 21, 2015).
7 See AR3 Remand Redetermination. See also
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of
Review and Amended Final Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 81 FR
2843 (January 19, 2016), for the revision of the PRCwide rate for the second administrative review.
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
5 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
upheld our AR3 Remand
Redetermination in its entirety.8
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, 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
Court’s final judgment affirming the
AR3 Remand Redetermination
constitutes the Court’s final decision
which is not in harmony with the AR3
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 a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court
decision, the Department is amending
the AR3 Final Results with respect to
the PRC-wide entity, which includes the
ATM Single Entity, as follows:
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(%)
Exporter
PRC-Wide Entity (which includes the ATM Single Entity) ....................................
82.05
In the event the Court’s ruling is not
appealed or, if appealed, upheld by a
final and conclusive court decision, the
Department will instruct the U.S.
Customs and Border Protection to assess
antidumping duties on unliquidated
entries of subject merchandise based on
the revised rate the Department
determined and listed above.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The current cash deposit rate for the
PRC-wide entity is 82.05 percent, and
thus same as the cash deposit rate
established in the AR3 Remand
Redetermination.9 Therefore, there is no
need to update the cash deposit rate for
the PRC-wide entity as a result of these
amended final results.
8 See
Gang Yan Diamond Products, Inc., 2016 Ct.
Intl. Trade LEXIS 49.
9 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China; Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–
2013, 80 FR 32344, 32345 (June 8, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: May 31, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016–13279 Filed 6–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–017]
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light
Truck Tires From the People’s
Republic of China: Initiation of
Countervailing Duty New Shipper
Review; 2014–2016
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On February 25, 2016, the
Department received a timely request
for a new shipper review (NSR) from
Shandong Xinghongyuan Tire Co., Ltd.
(SXT), in accordance with section
751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR
351.214(c). The Department of
Commerce (the Department) has
determined that the request for a NSR of
the countervailing duty order on certain
passenger vehicle and light truck tires
(passenger tires) from the People’s
Republic of China (PRC) meets the
statutory and regulatory requirements
for initiation. The period of review
(POR) is December 1, 2014, through
January 31, 2016.
DATES: Effective Date: June 6, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Hoadley, 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) 482–3148.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
The Department published the
countervailing duty order on passenger
tires from the PRC in the Federal
Register on August 10, 2015.1 On
February 25, 2016, pursuant to section
1 See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck
Tires From the People’s Republic of China:
Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Duty
Determination and Antidumping Duty Order; and
Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Countervailing Duty Order, 80
FR 47902 (August 10, 2015).
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 108 / Monday, June 6, 2016 / Notices
751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the ‘‘Act’’), and 19 CFR
351.214(b) and (c), the Department
received a timely request for a NSR from
SXT. Pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(i), SXT certified that it is
the exporter and producer of the
passenger tires for which the request for
a NSR is based, and certified that it did
not export passenger tires to the United
States during the period of investigation
(POI).2 Moreover, pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), SXT certified that,
since the investigation was initiated, it
never has been affiliated with any
exporter or producer who exported the
subject merchandise to the United
States during the POI, including those
not individually examined during the
investigation.3 Further, as required by
19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(v), it certified that
it informed the government of the PRC
that the government will be required to
provide a full response to the
Department’s questionnaires.4
In addition to the certifications
described above, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iv), SXT submitted
documentation establishing the
following: (1) The date of its first sale to
an unaffiliated customer in the United
States; (2) the date on which the
passenger tires were first entered for
consumption; (3) the volume of that
shipment.5
The Department queried the database
of U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) in an attempt to confirm that the
shipment reported by SXT had entered
the United States for consumption and
that liquidation had been suspended as
subject to the countervailing duty order.
The information which the Department
examined was consistent with that
provided by SXT in its request.6 In
particular, the CBP data confirmed the
price and quantity reported by SXT for
the sale that forms the basis for this NSR
request.
Period of Review
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(c), an
exporter or producer may request a NSR
within one year of the date on which its
subject merchandise was first entered.
Moreover, 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1) states
2 See SXT’s request for a NSR dated February 25,
2016, at Exhibit 2.
3 Id.
4 Id.
5 Id. at Exhibit 1.
6 See Memorandum to the File from Spencer
Toubia, ‘‘New Shipper Review of the
Countervailing Duty Order on Passenger Vehicle
and Light Truck Tires from the People’s Republic
of China: Customs Entries from January 1, 2013,’’
dated March 31, 2016.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
that if the request for the review is made
during the six-month period ending
with the end of the semiannual
anniversary month, the Department will
initiate a NSR in the calendar month
immediately following the semiannual
anniversary month. Further, 19 CFR
351.214(g)(2) and 19 CFR
351.213(e)(2)(ii) state that the first
review period after an order normally
will cover entries or exports from the
date of suspension of liquidation to the
end of the most recently completed
calendar year. However, since SXT’s
shipment entered the United States after
the end of 2015, and because SXT has
requested a concurrent NSR of the
antidumping duty order covering the
same shipment, we are expanding the
POR by one month.7 Therefore, the POR
is December 1, 2014, through January
31, 2016.8
Initiation of New Shipper Review
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b), and the
information on the record, the
Department finds that SXT’s request
meets the threshold requirements for
initiation of a NSR and, therefore, is
initiating a NSR of SXT. If the
information supplied by STX is found to
be incorrect or insufficient during the
course of this proceeding, the
Department may rescind the review for
STX or apply facts available pursuant to
section 776 of the Act, depending on the
facts on the record. Absent a
determination that the new shipper
review is extraordinarily complicated,
the Department intends to issue the
preliminary results within 180 days
after the date on which this review is
initiated and the final results within 90
days after the date on which we issue
the preliminary results.9
On February 24, 2016, the President
signed into law the ‘‘Trade Facilitation
and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015,’’
H.R. 644, which made several
amendments to section 751(a)(2)(B) of
the Act. We will conduct this new
shipper review in accordance with
section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, as
7 See Raw Flexible Magnets From the People’s
Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty
New Shipper Review, 75 FR 22741 (April 30, 2010)
(expanding the POR for a NSR of a CVD order); see
also Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties;
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27320 (May 19, 1997) (The
Department’s regulations ‘‘provide the Department
with sufficient flexibility to resolve any problems
that may arise {when the requestor’s first shipment
occurs after the calendar year in question} by
modifying the standard review period.’’).
8 See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(B).
9 See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.214(i).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36263
amended by the Trade Facilitation and
Trade Enforcement Act of 2015.10
Interested parties requiring access to
proprietary information in this
proceeding should submit applications
for disclosure under administrative
protective order in accordance with 19
CFR 351.305 and 351.306.
This initiation and notice are in
accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and
351.221(c)(1)(i).
Dated: May 27, 2016.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2016–13204 Filed 6–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–533–869]
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road
Tires From India: Postponement of
Preliminary Determination of
Antidumping Duty Investigation
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective June 6, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lilit
Astvatsatrian at (202) 482–6412 or
Trisha Tran at (202) 482–4852; AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On February 10, 2016, the Department
of Commerce (Department) published a
notice of initiation of an antidumping
duty investigation on certain new
pneumatic off-the-road tires (off road
tires) from India.1 Section 733(b)(1)(A)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1) state
the Department will make a preliminary
determination no later than 140 days
after the date of the initiation. The
current deadline for the preliminary
10 The Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement
Act of 2015 removed from section 751(a)(2)(B) of
the Act the provision directing the Department to
instruct CBP to allow an importer the option of
posting a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit
during the pendency of a new shipper review.
1 See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires
from India and the People’s Republic of China:
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigations, 81
FR 7073 (February 10, 2016).
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 108 (Monday, June 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36262-36263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13204]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-570-017]
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's
Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty New Shipper
Review; 2014-2016
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On February 25, 2016, the Department received a timely request
for a new shipper review (NSR) from Shandong Xinghongyuan Tire Co.,
Ltd. (SXT), in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.214(c). The
Department of Commerce (the Department) has determined that the request
for a NSR of the countervailing duty order on certain passenger vehicle
and light truck tires (passenger tires) from the People's Republic of
China (PRC) meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for
initiation. The period of review (POR) is December 1, 2014, through
January 31, 2016.
DATES: Effective Date: June 6, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Hoadley, 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-
3148.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the countervailing duty order on passenger
tires from the PRC in the Federal Register on August 10, 2015.\1\ On
February 25, 2016, pursuant to section
[[Page 36263]]
751(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the ``Act''),
and 19 CFR 351.214(b) and (c), the Department received a timely request
for a NSR from SXT. Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), SXT certified that it is the exporter and
producer of the passenger tires for which the request for a NSR is
based, and certified that it did not export passenger tires to the
United States during the period of investigation (POI).\2\ Moreover,
pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), SXT certified that, since the investigation was
initiated, it never has been affiliated with any exporter or producer
who exported the subject merchandise to the United States during the
POI, including those not individually examined during the
investigation.\3\ Further, as required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(v), it
certified that it informed the government of the PRC that the
government will be required to provide a full response to the
Department's questionnaires.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the
People's Republic of China: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping
Duty Determination and Antidumping Duty Order; and Amended Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Countervailing
Duty Order, 80 FR 47902 (August 10, 2015).
\2\ See SXT's request for a NSR dated February 25, 2016, at
Exhibit 2.
\3\ Id.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the certifications described above, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), SXT submitted documentation establishing the
following: (1) The date of its first sale to an unaffiliated customer
in the United States; (2) the date on which the passenger tires were
first entered for consumption; (3) the volume of that shipment.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Id. at Exhibit 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department queried the database of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) in an attempt to confirm that the shipment reported by
SXT had entered the United States for consumption and that liquidation
had been suspended as subject to the countervailing duty order. The
information which the Department examined was consistent with that
provided by SXT in its request.\6\ In particular, the CBP data
confirmed the price and quantity reported by SXT for the sale that
forms the basis for this NSR request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Memorandum to the File from Spencer Toubia, ``New
Shipper Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Passenger Vehicle
and Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China: Customs
Entries from January 1, 2013,'' dated March 31, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Review
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(c), an exporter or producer may request
a NSR within one year of the date on which its subject merchandise was
first entered. Moreover, 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1) states that if the
request for the review is made during the six-month period ending with
the end of the semiannual anniversary month, the Department will
initiate a NSR in the calendar month immediately following the
semiannual anniversary month. Further, 19 CFR 351.214(g)(2) and 19 CFR
351.213(e)(2)(ii) state that the first review period after an order
normally will cover entries or exports from the date of suspension of
liquidation to the end of the most recently completed calendar year.
However, since SXT's shipment entered the United States after the end
of 2015, and because SXT has requested a concurrent NSR of the
antidumping duty order covering the same shipment, we are expanding the
POR by one month.\7\ Therefore, the POR is December 1, 2014, through
January 31, 2016.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Raw Flexible Magnets From the People's Republic of
China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty New Shipper Review, 75 FR
22741 (April 30, 2010) (expanding the POR for a NSR of a CVD order);
see also Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62
FR 27296, 27320 (May 19, 1997) (The Department's regulations
``provide the Department with sufficient flexibility to resolve any
problems that may arise {when the requestor's first shipment occurs
after the calendar year in question{time} by modifying the standard
review period.'').
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(i)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of New Shipper Review
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b),
and the information on the record, the Department finds that SXT's
request meets the threshold requirements for initiation of a NSR and,
therefore, is initiating a NSR of SXT. If the information supplied by
STX is found to be incorrect or insufficient during the course of this
proceeding, the Department may rescind the review for STX or apply
facts available pursuant to section 776 of the Act, depending on the
facts on the record. Absent a determination that the new shipper review
is extraordinarily complicated, the Department intends to issue the
preliminary results within 180 days after the date on which this review
is initiated and the final results within 90 days after the date on
which we issue the preliminary results.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.214(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 24, 2016, the President signed into law the ``Trade
Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015,'' H.R. 644, which made
several amendments to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act. We will conduct
this new shipper review in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the
Act, as amended by the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of
2015.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015
removed from section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act the provision directing
the Department to instruct CBP to allow an importer the option of
posting a bond or security in lieu of a cash deposit during the
pendency of a new shipper review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties requiring access to proprietary information in
this proceeding should submit applications for disclosure under
administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and
351.306.
This initiation and notice are in accordance with section
751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and 351.221(c)(1)(i).
Dated: May 27, 2016.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2016-13204 Filed 6-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
