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; 2011-2012, 36261-36262 [2016-13279]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 108 / Monday, June 6, 2016 / Notices
CFR regulation that describes types of
eligible borrowers who are entities that
may also participate in the Rural Energy
Savings Program (RESP).
DATES: Effective on June 6, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Titilayo Ogunyale, Senior Advisor,
Office of the Administrator, Rural
Utilities Service, Rural Development,
United States Department of
Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue
SW., STOP 1510, Room 5136–S,
Washington, DC 20250–1510;
Telephone: (202) 720–0736; Email:
Titilayo.Ogunyale@wdc.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Rural
Utilities Service (RUS) published in the
Federal Register on May 24, 2016, at 81
FR 32719, a Notice of Comment
Solicitation seeking input on the Rural
Energy Savings Program. Inadvertently,
an inaccurate citation to the Code of
Federal Register (CFR) was included in
the Notice. This document removes all
references to the inaccurate CFR citation
published on May 24, 2016, and
replaces it with the correct citation to
the CFR.
In the Notice of Comment Solicitation
FR Doc. 2016–12192 published May 24,
2016, at 81 FR 32719, make the
following correction. Remove ‘‘7 CFR
1710.10’’ and add in its place ‘‘7 CFR
1710.101’’ on the following page:
Page 32719, third column, ‘‘Entities
eligible to borrow from RUS and relend to
consumers pursuant to RESP are not
restricted to electric utilities per se; entities
owned or controlled by current or former
RUS borrowers and those entities described
in 7 CFR 1710.101 may also participate in the
RESP program.’’
Dated: May 26, 2016.
Brandon McBride,
Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4682.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
On August
13, 2015, the Department of Commerce
(the Department) published in the
Federal Register the initiation of the
antidumping duty changed
circumstances review on tapered roller
bearings and parts thereof, finished and
unfinished (TRBs), from the People’s
Republic of China (PRC) to determine
whether to reinstate the antidumping
duty order with respect to Shanghai
General Bearing Co., Ltd. (SGBC/SKF).1
The period of review is June 1, 2014,
through May 31, 2015. In the Initiation,
the Department incorrectly stated in two
places that if we determine in this
changed circumstances review that
SGBC/SKF resumed dumping, ‘‘effective
on the date of the publication of our
final results,’’ 2 we will direct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
suspend liquidation of all entries of
TRBs manufactured in the PRC and
exported by SGBC/SKF. However, we
intended to state the following: ‘‘If we
preliminarily determine in this changed
circumstances review that SGBC/SKF
resumed dumping, we will direct CBP
to suspend liquidation of all entries of
TRBs manufactured in the PRC, and
exported, by SGBC/SKF’’ (emphasis also
added). As a result, we now correct the
Initiation as noted above.
This correction to the initiation of the
antidumping duty changed
circumstances review is issued and
published in accordance with section
751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended.
[A–570–900]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: May 26, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016–13248 Filed 6–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
[FR Doc. 2016–13203 Filed 6–3–16; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
International Trade Administration
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[A–570–601]
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished,
From the People’s Republic of China:
Notice of Correction to the Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alice Maldonado, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jun 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
36261
1 See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof,
Finished and Unfinished, from the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Correction to the
Initiation of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 80 FR 48493 (August 13,
2015) (Initiation).
2 Id., at 48493 and 48497 (emphasis added).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
International Trade Administration
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; 2011–2012
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 11, 2016, the United
States Court of International Trade (the
Court) sustained our final remand
redetermination pertaining to the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof from the
People’s Republic of China covering the
period November 1, 2011, through
October 31, 2012 (third administrative
review).1 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 of Commerce (the
Department) is notifying the public that
the Court’s final judgment in this case
is not in harmony with the AR3 Final
Results 2 and that the Department is
amending the AR3 Final Results with
respect to the PRC-wide entity,
including the ATM Single Entity.3
DATES: Effective Date: May 21, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, AD/
CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement
AGENCY:
1 See Gang Yan Diamond Products, Inc. v. United
States, Court No. 14–00148, slip op. 16–49, 2016 Ct.
Intl. Trade LEXIS 49 (Ct. Int’l Trade May 11, 2016);
Final Remand Redetermination pursuant to Gang
Yan Diamond Products, Inc. v. United States, Court
No. 14–00148, slip op. 15–127, (Ct. Int’l Trade Nov.
9, 2015), dated February 8, 2016, and available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/15-127.pdf
(AR3 Remand Redetermination), aff’d, Gang Yan
Diamond Products, Inc. 2016 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS
49.
2 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2011–
2012, 79 FR 35723 (June 24, 2014) (AR3 Final
Results).
3 The ATM Single Entity includes Advanced
Technology & Materials Co., Ltd., Beijing Gang Yan
Diamond Products Co., HXF Saw Co., Ltd., AT&M
International Trading Co., Ltd., and Cliff
International Ltd. See Diamond Sawblades and
Parts Thereof From the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 78 FR 77098,
77099 (December 20, 2013), unchanged in AR3
Final Results.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
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
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 108 (Monday, June 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36261-36262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13279]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-900]
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; 2011-2012
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 11, 2016, the United States Court of International
Trade (the Court) sustained our final remand redetermination pertaining
to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof from the People's Republic of China
covering the period November 1, 2011, through October 31, 2012 (third
administrative review).\1\ 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 of Commerce (the
Department) is notifying the public that the Court's final judgment in
this case is not in harmony with the AR3 Final Results \2\ and that the
Department is amending the AR3 Final Results with respect to the PRC-
wide entity, including the ATM Single Entity.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Gang Yan Diamond Products, Inc. v. United States, Court
No. 14-00148, slip op. 16-49, 2016 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 49 (Ct.
Int'l Trade May 11, 2016); Final Remand Redetermination pursuant to
Gang Yan Diamond Products, Inc. v. United States, Court No. 14-
00148, slip op. 15-127, (Ct. Int'l Trade Nov. 9, 2015), dated
February 8, 2016, and available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/15-127.pdf (AR3 Remand Redetermination), aff'd, Gang Yan
Diamond Products, Inc. 2016 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 49.
\2\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2011-2012, 79 FR 35723 (June 24, 2014) (AR3 Final Results).
\3\ The ATM Single Entity includes Advanced Technology &
Materials Co., Ltd., Beijing Gang Yan Diamond Products Co., HXF Saw
Co., Ltd., AT&M International Trading Co., Ltd., and Cliff
International Ltd. See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 78 FR 77098, 77099 (December 20,
2013), unchanged in AR3 Final Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: May 21, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD
Operations, Office I, Enforcement
[[Page 36262]]
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 PRC-wide
rate consistent with the immediately preceding administrative review,
i.e., the second administrative review.\7\ On May 11, 2016, the Court
upheld our AR3 Remand Redetermination in its entirety.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See AR3 Final Results, 79 FR at 35724, n.7.
\5\ See 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 PRC-wide rate
for the second administrative review.
\8\ See Gang Yan Diamond Products, Inc., 2016 Ct. Intl. Trade
LEXIS 49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter dumping
margin (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
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