Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice of Amended Final Results, 18111-18112 [2017-07679]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 72 / Monday, April 17, 2017 / Notices mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES allow for possible questions from the panel. C. Requirements for Submissions Persons submitting a notification of intent to testify or written comments must do so in English and must identify (on the reference line of the first page of the submission) ‘‘Comments Regarding Causes of Significant Trade Deficits for 2016.’’ In addition, if the submission covers the causes of significant trade deficits in more than one country, commenters should, whenever possible, provide a separate submission for each country. If identifying specific sectors, commenters should identify the relevant Harmonized System (HS) category(ies) for that sector. To ensure the timely receipt and consideration of comments, Commerce and USTR strongly encourage commenters to make on-line submissions, using the http:// www.regulations.gov Web site. All submissions must be in English and must be submitted electronically via www.regulations.gov, using docket number DOC–2017–0003. Handdelivered submissions will not be accepted. To submit comments via www.regulations.gov enter docket number DOC 2017–0003 on the home page and click ‘‘search.’’ The site will provide a search-results page listing all documents associated with this docket. Find a reference to this notice and click on the link entitled ‘‘Comment Now!’’ (For further information on using the www.regulations.gov Web site, please consult the resources provided on the Web site by clicking on ‘‘How to Use This Site’’ on the left side of the home page). The www.regulations.gov Web site allows users to provide comments by filling in a ‘‘Type Comment’’ field, or by attaching a document using an ‘‘Upload File’’ field. Commerce and USTR prefer that comments be provided in an attached document. If a document is attached, please identify the name of the country to which the submission pertains in the ‘‘Type Comment’’ field. For example: ‘‘See attached comments with respect to (name of country)’’. Commerce and USTR prefer submissions in Microsoft Word (.doc) or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf). If the submission is in an application other than those two, please indicate the name of the application in the ‘‘Type Comment’’ field. For any comments submitted electronically containing business confidential information, the file name of the business confidential version should begin with the characters ‘‘BC’’. Any page containing business confidential must be clearly marked VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Apr 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 ‘‘BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL’’ on the top of that page. Filers of submissions containing business confidential information must also submit a public version of their comments. The file name of the public version should begin with the character ‘‘P’’. The ‘‘BC’’ and ‘‘P’’ should be followed by the name of the person or entity submitting the comments or reply comments. Filers submitting comments containing no business confidential information should name their file using the name of the person or entity submitting the comments. Please do not attach separate cover letters to electronic submissions; rather, include any information that might appear in a cover letter in the comments themselves. Similarly, to the extent possible please include any exhibits, annexes, or other attachments in the same file as part of the submission itself rather than in separate files. As noted, Commerce and USTR strongly urge submitters to file comments through www.regulations.gov if at all possible. Any alternative arrangements must be made with Patrick Kirwan in advance of transmitting a comment. Patrick Kirwan can be reached at (202) 482–5455 or patrick.kirwan@trade.gov. General information concerning Commerce is available at www.commerce.gov and USTR at www.ustr.gov. Comments will be placed in the docket and open to public inspection, except confidential business information. Comments may be viewed on the www.regulations.gov Web site by entering the relevant docket number in the search field on the home page. Dated: April 13, 2017. Patrick Kirwan, Director, Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee Secretariat, U.S. Department of Commerce. [FR Doc. 2017–07827 Filed 4–14–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–25–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–898] Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice of Amended Final Results Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Court of International Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the final AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 18111 remand results pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on chlorinated isocyanurates (chloro isos) from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) covering the period of June 1, 2011, through May 31, 2012. The Department of Commerce (the Department) is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the final results of the administrative review and that the Department is amending the final results with respect to the dumping margins assigned to Juangcheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. (Kangtai), Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd. (Jiheng), and Arch Chemicals (China) Co., Ltd. (Arch). DATES: Effective January 29, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaitlin Wojnar, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3857. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On January 30, 2014, the Department issued the Final Results.1 Three parties contested the Department’s findings in the Final Results. All three plaintiffs (i.e., Kangtai, Jiheng, and Arch) are Chinese producers/exporters of chloro isos. Kangtai and Jiheng were mandatory respondents in the underlying administrative review; Arch was an unexamined respondent that demonstrated eligibility for separate rate status. In the Final Results, the Department assigned weighted-average dumping margins of 59.12 percent and 47.17 percent to Kangtai and Jiheng, respectively.2 As a separate rate company, Arch received the margin of 53.15 percent, which is the simple average of the margins calculated for individually examined respondents.3 On August 21, 2015, the CIT remanded various aspects of the Final Results to the Department. In particular, the Court instructed the Department to do the following: (1) Determine whether or not the selling, general, and administrative expenses contain certain labor items and explain how the methodology used by the Department in the Final Results is supported by 1 See Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2011–2012, 79 FR 4875 (January 30, 2014) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 See Final Results, 79 FR at 4876. 3 Id. E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM 17APN1 18112 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 72 / Monday, April 17, 2017 / Notices substantial evidence on the record; (2) select the best surrogate value (SV) rate for chlorine; (3) select the best SV for ammonium chloride; (4) select the best source of SV data for electricity; (5) reexamine the record evidence regarding the SV for ammonium sulfate; (6) explain and support the Department’s change in by-product methodology; and (7) consider all arguments from interested parties concerning the deduction of irrecoverable value added tax from U.S. price.4 Pursuant to Kangtai I, the Department issued its Final Redetermination, which addressed the Court’s holdings and revised the weighted-average dumping margins for Kangtai and Jiheng to 48.72 percent and 27.99 percent, respectively, and the simple average dumping margin for Arch to 38.36 percent.5 On January 19, 2017, the CIT sustained the Department’s Final Redetermination in full.6 Thus, the Court affirmed the following dumping margins as calculated by the Department in the Final Redetermination: 48.72 for Kangtai, 27.99 for Jiheng, and 38.36 for Arch. Timken Notice mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES In its decision in Timken,7 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,8 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 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 January 19, 2016, final judgment sustaining the Final Redetermination constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the Timken publication requirements. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation 4 See Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT Slip Op. 15–93, Consol. Ct. No. 14–00056 (August 21, 2015) (Kangtai I). 5 See Department Memorandum, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand,’’ April 15, 2016 (Final Redetermination) (available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/ 15-93.pdf). 6 See Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT Slip Op. 17–3, Consol. Ct. No. 14–00056 (January 19, 2017) (Kangtai II). 7 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 8 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Apr 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 of the subject merchandise pending a final and conclusive court decision. Amended Final Results Because there is now a final court decision, we are amending the Final Results with respect to the dumping margins calculated for Kangtai, Jiheng, and Arch. Based on the Final Redetermination, as affirmed by the CIT in Kangtai II, the revised dumping margins for Kangtai, Jiheng, and Arch from June 1, 2011, through May 31, 2012, are as follows: Producer/exporter Margins (percent) Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd ................................... Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd Arch Chemicals (China) Co., Ltd 48.72 27.99 38.36 In the event that the CIT’s rulings are not appealed or, if appealed, are upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, the Department will instruct Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise based on the revised dumping margins listed above. Cash Deposit Requirements Since the Final Results, the Department has established a new cash deposit rate for Kangtai and Jiheng.9 Therefore, this amended final determination does not change the laterestablished cash deposit rates for Kangtai and Jiheng. Arch does not have a superseding cash deposit rate and, therefore, the Department will issue revised cash deposit instructions to CBP, adjusting the cash deposit rate for Arch to 38.36 percent, effective January 29, 2017. Notification to Interested Parties This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: April 11, 2017. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2017–07679 Filed 4–14–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 9 See, e.g., Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014– 2015, 82 FR 4852, 4852 (January 17, 2017). PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–533–844] Certain Lined Paper Products From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) has completed its administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on certain lined paper products from India for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014. This review covers Goldenpalm Manufacturers PVT Limited (Goldenpalm). Based on an analysis of the comments received, the Department has made changes to the subsidy rate determined for Goldenpalm. The final subsidy rate is listed below in the section entitled, ‘‘Final Results of Administrative Review.’’ AGENCY: DATES: Effective April 17, 2017. John Conniff, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–1009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Background On October 11, 2016, the Department published the Preliminary Results of this administrative review.1 On February 14, 2017, the Department issued its Post-Preliminary Analysis Memorandum.2 Based on the comments received from Petitioner 3 and Goldenpalm, in these final results, we made changes to our methodology for the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS) program and corrected a ministerial error made in the context of our analysis of this program.4 1 See Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Calendar Year 2014, 81 FR 70091 (October 11, 2016), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (collectively, Preliminary Results). 2 See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations from Erin Begnal, Director, Office III, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Post-Preliminary Issues and Decision Memorandum,’’ dated February 14, 2017 (Post-Preliminary Analysis Memorandum). 3 Petitioner is the Association of American School Paper Suppliers. 4 For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 5. E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM 17APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 72 (Monday, April 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18111-18112]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07679]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-898]


Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: 
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice 
of Amended Final Results

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

SUMMARY: The Court of International Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the 
final remand results pertaining to the administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on chlorinated isocyanurates (chloro isos) from 
the People's Republic of China (PRC) covering the period of June 1, 
2011, through May 31, 2012. The Department of Commerce (the Department) 
is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in 
harmony with the final results of the administrative review and that 
the Department is amending the final results with respect to the 
dumping margins assigned to Juangcheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. 
(Kangtai), Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd. (Jiheng), and Arch Chemicals 
(China) Co., Ltd. (Arch).

DATES: Effective January 29, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaitlin Wojnar, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3857.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On January 30, 2014, the Department issued the Final Results.\1\ 
Three parties contested the Department's findings in the Final Results. 
All three plaintiffs (i.e., Kangtai, Jiheng, and Arch) are Chinese 
producers/exporters of chloro isos. Kangtai and Jiheng were mandatory 
respondents in the underlying administrative review; Arch was an 
unexamined respondent that demonstrated eligibility for separate rate 
status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 
2011-2012, 79 FR 4875 (January 30, 2014) (Final Results), and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Final Results, the Department assigned weighted-average 
dumping margins of 59.12 percent and 47.17 percent to Kangtai and 
Jiheng, respectively.\2\ As a separate rate company, Arch received the 
margin of 53.15 percent, which is the simple average of the margins 
calculated for individually examined respondents.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Final Results, 79 FR at 4876.
    \3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 21, 2015, the CIT remanded various aspects of the Final 
Results to the Department. In particular, the Court instructed the 
Department to do the following: (1) Determine whether or not the 
selling, general, and administrative expenses contain certain labor 
items and explain how the methodology used by the Department in the 
Final Results is supported by

[[Page 18112]]

substantial evidence on the record; (2) select the best surrogate value 
(SV) rate for chlorine; (3) select the best SV for ammonium chloride; 
(4) select the best source of SV data for electricity; (5) reexamine 
the record evidence regarding the SV for ammonium sulfate; (6) explain 
and support the Department's change in by-product methodology; and (7) 
consider all arguments from interested parties concerning the deduction 
of irrecoverable value added tax from U.S. price.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd., et al. v. United 
States, CIT Slip Op. 15-93, Consol. Ct. No. 14-00056 (August 21, 
2015) (Kangtai I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Kangtai I, the Department issued its Final 
Redetermination, which addressed the Court's holdings and revised the 
weighted-average dumping margins for Kangtai and Jiheng to 48.72 
percent and 27.99 percent, respectively, and the simple average dumping 
margin for Arch to 38.36 percent.\5\ On January 19, 2017, the CIT 
sustained the Department's Final Redetermination in full.\6\ Thus, the 
Court affirmed the following dumping margins as calculated by the 
Department in the Final Redetermination: 48.72 for Kangtai, 27.99 for 
Jiheng, and 38.36 for Arch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Department Memorandum, ``Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand,'' April 
15, 2016 (Final Redetermination) (available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/15-93.pdf).
    \6\ See Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd., et al. v. United 
States, CIT Slip Op. 17-3, Consol. Ct. No. 14-00056 (January 19, 
2017) (Kangtai II).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\7\ as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,\8\ 
the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 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 January 
19, 2016, final judgment sustaining the Final Redetermination 
constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with 
the Department's Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment 
of the Timken publication requirements. Accordingly, the Department 
will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise 
pending a final and conclusive court decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed. 
Cir. 1990) (Timken).
    \8\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court decision, we are amending the 
Final Results with respect to the dumping margins calculated for 
Kangtai, Jiheng, and Arch. Based on the Final Redetermination, as 
affirmed by the CIT in Kangtai II, the revised dumping margins for 
Kangtai, Jiheng, and Arch from June 1, 2011, through May 31, 2012, are 
as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margins
                      Producer/exporter                        (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd.........................       48.72
Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd..............................       27.99
Arch Chemicals (China) Co., Ltd.............................       38.36
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event that the CIT's rulings are not appealed or, if 
appealed, are upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, the 
Department will instruct Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess 
antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise based 
on the revised dumping margins listed above.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Since the Final Results, the Department has established a new cash 
deposit rate for Kangtai and Jiheng.\9\ Therefore, this amended final 
determination does not change the later-established cash deposit rates 
for Kangtai and Jiheng. Arch does not have a superseding cash deposit 
rate and, therefore, the Department will issue revised cash deposit 
instructions to CBP, adjusting the cash deposit rate for Arch to 38.36 
percent, effective January 29, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2014-2015, 82 FR 4852, 4852 (January 17, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 11, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017-07679 Filed 4-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P