Certain Lined Paper Products From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014, 18112-18113 [2017-07697]

Download as PDF 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 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 72 / Monday, April 17, 2017 / Notices Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to the order is certain lined paper products. The products are currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers: 4811.90.9035, 4811.90.9080, 4820.30.0040, 4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9050, 4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, 4820.10.2020, 4820.10.2030, 4820.10.2040, 4820.10.2050, 4820.10.2060, and 4820.10.4000. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive. For a complete description of the scope of this administrative review, see Issues and Decision Memorandum.5 the methodology underlying all of the Department’s conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. Analysis of Comments Received The issues raised by petitioner in its case brief and Goldenpalm in its rebuttal brief are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.6 A list of the issues raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached at the Appendix to this notice. 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 (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https:// access.trade.gov and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://trade.gov/enforcement/frn/ index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Administrative Review In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we determine the total estimated net countervailable subsidy rate for the mandatory respondent, Goldenpalm, for the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014, to be: mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES Methodology The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.7 For a description of 5 See Memorandum from James Maeder, Senior Director, Office I, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Lined Paper Products from India,’’ dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 6 See Issues and Decision Memorandum. 7 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:14 Apr 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 Use of Facts Available and Adverse Inferences In making our findings, we relied, in part, on facts otherwise available with regard to the Duty Drawback (DDB) program. Further, because the Government of India did not act to the best of its ability to respond to the Department’s requests for information concerning the DDB program, we drew an adverse inference in selecting from among the facts otherwise available, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. See Issues and Decision Memorandum. Net subsidy rate (percent) Company Goldenpalm Manufacturers PVT Limited. 6.56 percent ad valorem. Assessment Rates Consistent with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), the Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review. We will instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review in the amount listed above. Cash Deposit Instructions The Department intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated CVDs in the amount shown above for Goldenpalm on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of these results of review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated CVDs at the most recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit requirements that will be applied to companies covered by this order, but not examined in this review, are those established in the most recently completed segment of the proceeding for each company. These cash deposit requirements, when of the Act regarding benefit; and, section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 18113 imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Disclosure We intend to disclose the calculations performed to interested parties within five days of the publication of these final results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Administrative Protective Order This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: April 10, 2017. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Subsides Valuation Information V. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences VI. Analysis of Programs VII. Analysis of Comments Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Reject Petitioner’s Case Brief Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Attribute the Benefits that Goldenpalm Received Under Certain Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS) Licenses to Exports of the Subject Merchandise. Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Allocate Benefits for Certain EPCGS Licenses Over the Average Useful Life (AUL) of the Subject Merchandise Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Apply Partial Adverse Facts Available (AFA) to Goldenpalm and Whether the Department Should Use Goldenpalm’s Company-Specific Interest Rates as Benchmarks Comment 5: Whether Goldenpalm Understated Its EPCGS Benefits Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Find that the Annexure 45 Program Provides Countervailable Subsidies VIII. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2017–07697 Filed 4–14–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM 17APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 72 (Monday, April 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18112-18113]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07697]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-844]


Certain Lined Paper Products From India: Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014

AGENCY: 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.''

DATES: Effective April 17, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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.

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.

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

[[Page 18113]]

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the order is certain lined paper 
products. The products are currently classifiable under the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers: 
4811.90.9035, 4811.90.9080, 4820.30.0040, 4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9050, 
4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, 4820.10.2020, 4820.10.2030, 4820.10.2040, 
4820.10.2050, 4820.10.2060, and 4820.10.4000. Although the HTSUS 
numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written 
product description remains dispositive.
    For a complete description of the scope of this administrative 
review, see Issues and Decision Memorandum.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Memorandum from James Maeder, Senior Director, Office I, 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. 
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 
Compliance, ``Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain 
Lined Paper Products from India,'' dated concurrently with, and 
hereby adopted this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    The issues raised by petitioner in its case brief and Goldenpalm in 
its rebuttal brief are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.\6\ A list of the issues raised, and to which we responded 
in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached at the Appendix to 
this notice. 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 (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 
B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a 
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed 
directly at http://trade.gov/enforcement/frn/index.html. The signed 
Issues and Decision Memorandum and electronic version of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Methodology

    The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 
751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each 
of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a 
subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives 
rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is 
specific.\7\ For a description of the methodology underlying all of the 
Department's conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding 
financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding 
benefit; and, section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Facts Available and Adverse Inferences

    In making our findings, we relied, in part, on facts otherwise 
available with regard to the Duty Drawback (DDB) program. Further, 
because the Government of India did not act to the best of its ability 
to respond to the Department's requests for information concerning the 
DDB program, we drew an adverse inference in selecting from among the 
facts otherwise available, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the 
Act. See Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Final Results of Administrative Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we determine the total 
estimated net countervailable subsidy rate for the mandatory 
respondent, Goldenpalm, for the period January 1, 2014, through 
December 31, 2014, to be:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Company                    Net subsidy rate (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goldenpalm Manufacturers PVT Limited....  6.56 percent
                                          ad valorem.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    Consistent with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), the Department intends to 
issue assessment instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of 
this review. We will instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on 
all appropriate entries covered by this review in the amount listed 
above.

Cash Deposit Instructions

    The Department intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of 
estimated CVDs in the amount shown above for Goldenpalm on shipments of 
subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the date of publication of these results of 
review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to collect 
cash deposits of estimated CVDs at the most recent company-specific or 
all-others rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash 
deposit requirements that will be applied to companies covered by this 
order, but not examined in this review, are those established in the 
most recently completed segment of the proceeding for each company. 
These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect 
until further notice.

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed to interested 
parties within five days of the publication of these final results in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with 
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: April 10, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Subsides Valuation Information
V. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences
VI. Analysis of Programs
VII. Analysis of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Reject Petitioner's 
Case Brief
    Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Attribute the Benefits 
that Goldenpalm Received Under Certain Export Promotion Capital 
Goods Scheme (EPCGS) Licenses to Exports of the Subject Merchandise.
    Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Allocate Benefits for 
Certain EPCGS Licenses Over the Average Useful Life (AUL) of the 
Subject Merchandise
    Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Apply Partial Adverse 
Facts Available (AFA) to Goldenpalm and Whether the Department 
Should Use Goldenpalm's Company-Specific Interest Rates as 
Benchmarks
    Comment 5: Whether Goldenpalm Understated Its EPCGS Benefits
    Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Find that the Annexure 
45 Program Provides Countervailable Subsidies
VIII. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2017-07697 Filed 4-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P