Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 26912-26914 [2017-12106]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
26912
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Notices
during the meeting, comments must be
received no later than 5 p.m. EDT on
Wednesday, June 21, 2017, to ensure
transmission to the Board prior to the
meeting. Comments received after that
date and time will be distributed to the
members but may not be considered
during the meeting. Copies of Board
meeting minutes will be available
within 90 days of the meeting.
Dated: June 6, 2017.
Brian Beall,
Executive Secretary, United States Travel and
Tourism Advisory Board.
[FR Doc. 2017–12047 Filed 6–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2014–2015
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 9, 2016, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof (diamond
sawblades) from the People’s Republic
of China (the PRC). The period of review
(POR) is November 1, 2014, through
October 31, 2015. For the final results,
we continue to find that certain
companies covered by this review made
sales of subject merchandise at less than
normal value.
DATES: Effective June 12, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yang Jin Chun or Bryan Hansen, AD/
CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
AGENCY:
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–5760 and (202) 482–3683,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 9, 2016, the Department
published the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades from the PRC.1 We received
case and rebuttal briefs with respect to
the Preliminary Results. The deadline
for the final results of this review is June
7, 2017. We conducted this
administrative review in accordance
with section 751 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order
is diamond sawblades. The diamond
sawblades subject to the order are
currently classifiable under subheadings
8202 to 8206 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS),
and may also enter under subheading
6804.21.00. The HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and
customs purposes. A full description of
the scope of the order is contained in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2
The written description is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this
administrative review are addressed in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
A list of the issues raised is attached to
this notice as an appendix. 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
on the Enforcement and Compliance
Web site at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
Final Determination of No Shipments
We preliminarily found that Danyang
City Ou Di Ma Tools Co., Ltd., Danyang
Tsunda Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.,
Qingdao Hyosung Diamond Tools Co.,
Ltd., Qingdao Shinhan Diamond
Industrial Co., Ltd., and Shanghai
Starcraft Tools Co., Ltd., which have
been eligible for separate rates in
previous segments of the proceeding
and are subject to this review, did not
have any reviewable entries of subject
merchandise during the POR.3 After the
Preliminary Results, we received no
comments or additional information
with respect to these five companies.
Therefore, for the final results, we
continue to find that these five
companies did not have any reviewable
entries of subject merchandise during
the POR. Consistent with our practice,
we will issue appropriate instructions to
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) based on our final results.
Separate Rates
The Department preliminarily
determined that 24 respondents are
eligible to receive separate rates in this
review.4 We made no changes to these
determinations for the final results.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
We made revisions to the Preliminary
Results following our findings in the
verification of Bosun Tools Co., Ltd.’s
U.S. sales.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of this administrative
review, we determine that the following
weighted-average dumping margins
exist for the period November 1, 2014,
through October 31, 2015:
Margin
(percent)
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Company
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd ...........................................................................................................................................................................
Chengdu Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd .........................................................................................................................................
Danyang Hantronic Import & Export Co., Ltd .....................................................................................................................................
Danyang Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd .............................................................................................................
Danyang Like Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................................................
Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd ....................................................................................................................................
Danyang Weiwang Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd ...............................................................................................................................
1 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from
the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014–
2015, 81 FR 89045 (December 9, 2016) (Preliminary
Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision
Memorandum.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:28 Jun 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
2 See the Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Diamond Sawblades
and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of
China,’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum) dated
concurrently with and hereby adopted by this
notice, at 4.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
3 See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 89045, n.2,
and accompanying Preliminary Decision
Memorandum at 3.
4 See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 89045, n.6,
and accompanying Preliminary Decision
Memorandum at 4–8.
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Notices
Margin
(percent)
Company
Guilin Tebon Superhard Material Co., Ltd ..........................................................................................................................................
Hangzhou Deer King Industrial and Trading Co., Ltd .........................................................................................................................
Hangzhou Kingburg Import & Export Co., Ltd ....................................................................................................................................
Huzhou Gu’s Import & Export Co., Ltd ...............................................................................................................................................
Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity 5 ............................................................................................................................................................
Jiangsu Inter-China Group Corporation ..............................................................................................................................................
Jiangsu Youhe Tool Manufacturer Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................................
Qingyuan Shangtai Diamond Tools Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................................................
Quanzhou Zhongzhi Diamond Tool Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................................................
Rizhao Hein Saw Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................................................................................
Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................................
Shanghai Jingquan Industrial Trade Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................................
Sino Tools Co., Ltd ..............................................................................................................................................................................
Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................
Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd 6 .............................................................................................................................
Xiamen ZL Diamond Technology Co., Ltd ..........................................................................................................................................
Zhejiang Wanli Tools Group Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Assessment
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the
Department shall determine, and CBP
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this
review.7 For a customer or importer of
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd., we have
calculated a customer/importer-specific
ad valorem antidumping duty
assessment rate in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(b)(1).
For the Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity,
we will instruct CBP to apply an
antidumping duty assessment rate of
82.05 percent to all entries of subject
merchandise that entered the United
States during the POR. For all nonselected respondents that received a
separate rate, we will instruct CBP to
apply an antidumping duty assessment
rate of 6.19 percent 8 to all entries of
subject merchandise that entered the
United States during the POR. For all
other companies, we will instruct CBP
to apply the antidumping duty
assessment rate of the PRC-wide entity,
82.05 percent, to all entries of subject
merchandise exported by these
companies.9
5 We continue to treat Jiangsu Fengtai Diamond
Tool Manufacture Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Fengtai Tools
Co., Ltd., and Jiangsu Fengtai Sawing Industry Co.,
Ltd., as a single entity. See Preliminary Results, 81
FR at 89046, and accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum at 2, n.4 for details.
6 Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.,
is the successor-in-interest to Wuhan Wanbang
Laser Diamond Tools Co. See Diamond Sawblades
and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 81 FR 20618 (April 8, 2016).
7 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
8 See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 5–6.
9 See Initiation Notice, 81 FR at 737 (‘‘All firms
listed below that wish to qualify for separate rate
status in the administrative reviews involving NME
countries must complete, as appropriate, either a
separate rate application or certification, as
described below.’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:28 Jun 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
For entries that were not reported in
the U.S. sales databases submitted by
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd., the Department
will instruct CBP to liquidate such
entries at the PRC-wide rate. In
addition, for the five companies that we
determined had no reviewable entries of
the subject merchandise in this review
period, any suspended entries that
entered under that exporter’s case
number (i.e., at that exporter’s rate) will
be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.
We intend to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of the final results of
review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise from the PRC
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For subject
merchandise exported by the companies
listed above that have separate rates, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate
established in these final results of
review for each exporter as listed above;
(2) for previously investigated or
reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters
not listed above that received a separate
rate in a prior segment of this
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the exporter-specific rate;
(3) for all PRC exporters of subject
merchandise that have not been found
to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash
deposit rate will be that for the PRCwide entity; (4) for all non-PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which
have not received their own rate, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate
applicable to the PRC exporter that
supplied that non-PRC exporter. These
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
26913
Sfmt 4703
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
82.05
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
6.19
deposit requirements shall remain in
effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during this review period. Failure to
comply with this requirement could
result in the Department’s presumption
that reimbursement of the antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3).
Timely written notification of the return
or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation subject to sanction.
These final results of review are
issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the
Act.
Dated: June 6, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
Appendix
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Surrogate Country
V. Separate Rates
VI. Discussion of the Issues
a. Adverse Facts Available
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
26914
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Notices
b. Differential Pricing
c. Value-Added Tax
d. Surrogate Values
VII. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2017–12106 Filed 6–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel
Review: Notice of NAFTA Panel
Decision
United States Section, NAFTA
Secretariat, International Trade
Administration, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of NAFTA Panel
Decision in the matter of
Supercalendered Paper from Canada:
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination (Secretariat File Number:
USA–CDA–2015–1904–01).
AGENCY:
On April 13, 2017, the
Binational Panel issued its
Memorandum Opinion and Order in the
matter of Supercalendered Paper from
Canada: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination
(Final Determination). The Binational
Panel affirmed in part and remanded in
part the Final Determination by the
United States Department of Commerce
(Commerce) and copies of the NAFTA
Panel Decision are available from the
United States Section of the NAFTA
Secretariat.
SUMMARY:
Paul
E. Morris, United States Secretary,
NAFTA Secretariat, Room 2061, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230, (202) 482–5438.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter
19 of Article 1904 of NAFTA provides
a dispute settlement mechanism
involving trade remedy determinations
issued by the Government of the United
States, the Government of Canada, and
the Government of Mexico. Following a
Request for Panel Review, a Binational
Panel is composed to review the trade
remedy determination being challenged
and issue a binding Panel Decision.
There are established NAFTA Rules of
Procedure for Article 1904 Binational
Panel Reviews (Rules) and the NAFTA
Panel Decision has been notified in
accordance with Rule 70. For the
complete Rules, please see https://
www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Home/Textsof-the-Agreement/Rules-of-Procedure/
Article-1904.
Panel Decision: On April 13, 2017, the
Binational Panel issued its
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:28 Jun 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
Memorandum Opinion and Order
which affirmed in part and remanded in
part the Final Determination by
Commerce. The Binational Panel
concluded and ordered that Commerce’s
Final Determination is remanded for
further consideration consistent with
the Panel’s decision with respect to (1)
the use of Commerce’s ‘‘concurrent
subsidies’’ methodology to analyze the
provision of ‘‘hot idle’’ funding to Port
Hawkesbury Paper LLP (PHP) in a
transaction between private parties; (2)
Commerce’s conclusion that the
Government of Nova Scotia entrusted
and directed Nova Scotia Power, Inc. to
make a financial contribution by
providing electricity; (3) Commerce’s
conclusion that Nova Scotia Power, Inc.
provided electricity for less than
adequate remuneration, addressing both
its conclusion that a Tier 1 benchmark
was not available and its calculation of
a Tier 3 benchmark; (4) the use of
Commerce’s ‘‘concurrent subsidies
methodology’’ with respect to granting
of Forestry Infrastructure monies to New
Page Port Hawkesbury (NPPH) prior to
its acquisition by Pacific West
Commercial Corporation (PWCC); (5)
Commerce’s statement that the
administrative record contains no
evidence of a hostile takeover of Fibrek
by Resolute; (6) Commerce’s failure to
examine whether the grants to Resolute
under the Northern Industrial Electricity
Rate and Forestry Sector Prosperity
Funds programs were tied to the
production of a particular product or to
the production of an input product; and
(7) Commerce’s use of the same nonrecurring grant as the source for Adverse
Facts Available for both recurring and
non-recurring grants.
The Binational Panel ordered that to
the extent not rendered moot by
Commerce’s explanation on remand as
to why a Tier 1 benchmark for
measuring the adequacy of
remuneration of Port Hawkesbury’s
electricity was not available,
Commerce’s October 21, 2016 motion
for a voluntary remand to consider
whether Commerce should include a
separate component for return on equity
in its Tier 3 benchmark for measuring
the adequacy of remuneration of Port
Hawkesbury’s electricity is granted, and
the calculation of the benchmark for
such purchases is hereby remanded.
The Binational Panel further ordered
that the Final Determination in all other
respects is sustained and directed
Commerce to submit its redetermination
on remand within 75 days of the date
of issue of the NAFTA Panel Decision.
For the full Memorandum Opinion and
Order, please see https://www.nafta-sec-
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
alena.org/Home/Dispute-Settlement/
Decisions-and-Reports.
Dated: June 6, 2017.
Paul E. Morris,
U.S. Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.
[FR Doc. 2017–12039 Filed 6–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–201–845]
Antidumping Suspension Agreement
on Sugar From Mexico: Rescission of
2014–2015 and 2015–2016
Administrative Reviews
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 1, 2017, the
Department notified the producers/
exporters that were signatories to the
Agreement Suspending the
Antidumping Duty Investigation on
sugar from Mexico (the AD Agreement)
of its intent to terminate the AD
Agreement unless a new agreement was
reached on or before June 5, 2017. The
Department subsequently modified its
notice of intent to terminate the AD
Agreement, stating its continued intent
to terminate the AD Agreement unless
an amended agreement was reached on
or before June 6, 2017. Because the
Department intends to terminate the AD
Agreement, or, in the alternative, amend
the AD Agreement prior to the
expiration of the termination period, the
two ongoing administrative reviews of
the original AD Agreement are now
moot, and the Department is rescinding
both administrative reviews.
DATES: Effective June 5, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sally C. Gannon or David Cordell,
Enforcement & Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–0162 or
(202) 482–0408.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
Investigation and Issuance of the AD
Agreement
On April 17, 2014, the Department
initiated an antidumping duty
investigation under section 732 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
to determine whether imports of sugar
from Mexico are being, or are likely to
be, sold in the United States at less than
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 111 (Monday, June 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26912-26914]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12106]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-
2015
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 9, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts
thereof (diamond sawblades) from the People's Republic of China (the
PRC). The period of review (POR) is November 1, 2014, through October
31, 2015. For the final results, we continue to find that certain
companies covered by this review made sales of subject merchandise at
less than normal value.
DATES: Effective June 12, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun or Bryan Hansen, AD/CVD
Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5760 and (202) 482-3683,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 9, 2016, the Department published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
diamond sawblades from the PRC.\1\ We received case and rebuttal briefs
with respect to the Preliminary Results. The deadline for the final
results of this review is June 7, 2017. We conducted this
administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 81 FR 89045 (December 9, 2016)
(Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order is diamond sawblades. The
diamond sawblades subject to the order are currently classifiable under
subheadings 8202 to 8206 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS), and may also enter under subheading 6804.21.00.
The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs
purposes. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\2\ The written description is
dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See the Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Diamond
Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China,''
(Issues and Decision Memorandum) dated concurrently with and hereby
adopted by this notice, at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as
an appendix. 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 on the Enforcement and Compliance Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
Final Determination of No Shipments
We preliminarily found that Danyang City Ou Di Ma Tools Co., Ltd.,
Danyang Tsunda Diamond Tools Co., Ltd., Qingdao Hyosung Diamond Tools
Co., Ltd., Qingdao Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd., and Shanghai
Starcraft Tools Co., Ltd., which have been eligible for separate rates
in previous segments of the proceeding and are subject to this review,
did not have any reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the
POR.\3\ After the Preliminary Results, we received no comments or
additional information with respect to these five companies. Therefore,
for the final results, we continue to find that these five companies
did not have any reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the
POR. Consistent with our practice, we will issue appropriate
instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) based on our
final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 89045, n.2, and
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate Rates
The Department preliminarily determined that 24 respondents are
eligible to receive separate rates in this review.\4\ We made no
changes to these determinations for the final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 89045, n.6, and
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 4-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
We made revisions to the Preliminary Results following our findings
in the verification of Bosun Tools Co., Ltd.'s U.S. sales.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of this administrative review, we determine that the
following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period
November 1, 2014, through October 31, 2015:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Company (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd.................................... 6.19
Chengdu Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.................. 6.19
Danyang Hantronic Import & Export Co., Ltd.............. 6.19
Danyang Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd... 6.19
Danyang Like Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd............... 6.19
Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd............... 6.19
Danyang Weiwang Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd............ 6.19
[[Page 26913]]
Guilin Tebon Superhard Material Co., Ltd................ 6.19
Hangzhou Deer King Industrial and Trading Co., Ltd...... 6.19
Hangzhou Kingburg Import & Export Co., Ltd.............. 6.19
Huzhou Gu's Import & Export Co., Ltd.................... 6.19
Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity \5\....................... 82.05
Jiangsu Inter-China Group Corporation................... 6.19
Jiangsu Youhe Tool Manufacturer Co., Ltd................ 6.19
Qingyuan Shangtai Diamond Tools Co., Ltd................ 6.19
Quanzhou Zhongzhi Diamond Tool Co., Ltd................. 6.19
Rizhao Hein Saw Co., Ltd................................ 6.19
Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.............. 6.19
Shanghai Jingquan Industrial Trade Co., Ltd............. 6.19
Sino Tools Co., Ltd..................................... 6.19
Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd........ 6.19
Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd \6\.......... 6.19
Xiamen ZL Diamond Technology Co., Ltd................... 6.19
Zhejiang Wanli Tools Group Co., Ltd..................... 6.19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b),
the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.\7\ For a
customer or importer of Bosun Tools Co., Ltd., we have calculated a
customer/importer-specific ad valorem antidumping duty assessment rate
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ We continue to treat Jiangsu Fengtai Diamond Tool
Manufacture Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Fengtai Tools Co., Ltd., and Jiangsu
Fengtai Sawing Industry Co., Ltd., as a single entity. See
Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 89046, and accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum at 2, n.4 for details.
\6\ Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd., is the
successor-in-interest to Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co. See
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances
Review, 81 FR 20618 (April 8, 2016).
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity, we will instruct CBP to
apply an antidumping duty assessment rate of 82.05 percent to all
entries of subject merchandise that entered the United States during
the POR. For all non-selected respondents that received a separate
rate, we will instruct CBP to apply an antidumping duty assessment rate
of 6.19 percent \8\ to all entries of subject merchandise that entered
the United States during the POR. For all other companies, we will
instruct CBP to apply the antidumping duty assessment rate of the PRC-
wide entity, 82.05 percent, to all entries of subject merchandise
exported by these companies.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum at 5-6.
\9\ See Initiation Notice, 81 FR at 737 (``All firms listed
below that wish to qualify for separate rate status in the
administrative reviews involving NME countries must complete, as
appropriate, either a separate rate application or certification, as
described below.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases
submitted by Bosun Tools Co., Ltd., the Department will instruct CBP to
liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide rate. In addition, for the five
companies that we determined had no reviewable entries of the subject
merchandise in this review period, any suspended entries that entered
under that exporter's case number (i.e., at that exporter's rate) will
be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.
We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the
date of publication of the final results of review.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date as
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For subject
merchandise exported by the companies listed above that have separate
rates, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in these
final results of review for each exporter as listed above; (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not
listed above that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-
specific rate; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that
have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit
rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity; (4) for all non-PRC
exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC
exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit
requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject
to sanction.
These final results of review are issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: June 6, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Surrogate Country
V. Separate Rates
VI. Discussion of the Issues
a. Adverse Facts Available
[[Page 26914]]
b. Differential Pricing
c. Value-Added Tax
d. Surrogate Values
VII. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2017-12106 Filed 6-9-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
