Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Determination of the Countervailing Duty Investigation, 48277-48278 [2018-20724]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 185 / Monday, September 24, 2018 / Notices
(10) calendar days following publication
of this notice. These petitions are
received pursuant to section 251 of the
Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
Please follow the requirements set
forth in EDA’s regulations at 13 CFR
315.9 for procedures to request a public
hearing. The Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance official number
and title for the program under which
these petitions are submitted is 11.313,
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms.
Irette Patterson,
Program Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2018–20654 Filed 9–21–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–WH–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–580–882]
Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products
From the Republic of Korea: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With
Amended Final Determination of the
Countervailing Duty Investigation
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 10, 2018, the
United States Court of International
Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the final
remand results pertaining to the
countervailing duty (CVD) investigation
on certain cold-rolled steel flat products
from the Republic of Korea covering the
period January 1, 2014, through
December 31, 2014. The Department of
Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the
public that the final judgement in this
case is not in harmony with the
Amended Final Determination of the
CVD investigation and that Commerce is
amending the Amended Final
Determination with respect to the CVD
rate assigned to POSCO.
DATES: Applicable September 20, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yasmin Bordas at (202) 482–3813, AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
AGENCY:
Background
On July 29, 2016, Commerce
published its Final Determination.1
Upon consideration of ministerial error
allegations, Commerce issued an
Amended Final Determination and
1 See
Final Determination, 81 FR 49943.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:40 Sep 21, 2018
Jkt 244001
calculated a subsidy rate of 59.72
percent for POSCO.2
On March, 8, 2018, the CIT remanded
various aspects of the Amended Final
Determination to Commerce.3 In its
Remand Order, the Court held that
‘‘substantial evidence supports
Commerce’s decision to apply facts
available.’’ 4 The Court held that the
record demonstrated that POSCO
‘‘withheld information, failed to timely
provide information, and impeded the
proceeding,’’ and that POSCO’s ‘‘failure
to supply the requested information’’
reflected a failure to act to the best of
its ability.5
However, the Court also held that
Commerce had not conducted an
‘‘evaluation of the specific situation,’’
under the relatively new statutory
language of section 776(d)(2) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act)
and had not explained ‘‘why this case
justified its selection of the highest
rates.’’ 6 In addition, the Court
concluded that the 1.64 percent rate
from Refrigerators from Korea was
‘‘derived from estimates Commerce
made on the basis of an adverse
inference,’’ and, therefore, was not
corroborated, under section 776(c) of the
Act.7 The Court, therefore, instructed
2 See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain
Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic
of Korea: Final Affirmative Determination, 81 FR
49943 (July 29, 2016) (Final Results) and
accompanying Memorandum, entitled ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination
in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain
Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic
of Korea’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum); see
also ‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain
Cold-Rolled Steel flat Products from the Republic
of Korea: Final Determination Calculation
Memorandum for POSCO, dated July 20, 2016
(POSCO Final Analysis Memorandum). On
September 20, 2016, the Commerce published its
amended final results upon consideration of various
ministerial error allegations. See Certain ColdRolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, India, and
the Republic of Korea: Amended Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and
Countervailing Duty Order (the Republic of Korea)
and Countervailing Duty Orders (Brazil and India),
81 FR 64436 (September 20, 2016) (Amended Final
Results); see also ‘‘Response to Ministerial Error
Comments Filed by Hyundai Steel Co. Ltd. and
POSCO,’’ dated August 24, 2016 (Ministerial Error
Memo); and ‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the
Republic of Korea: Amended Final Determination
Calculation Memorandum for POSCO,’’ dated
August 24, 2016 (POSCO Amended Final Analysis
Memorandum).
3 See POSCO et al., and AK Steel Corporation, et
al., v. United States and Steel Dynamic Inc., et al.,
Consol. Court No. 16–00225, Slip Op. 18–18 (CIT
2018) (Remand Order).
4 See Remand Order at 26.
5 Id. at 26–27.
6 Id. at 49.
7 Id. at 57–58. See also Bottom Mount
Combination Refrigerator-Freezers from the
Republic of Korea: Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination, 77 FR 17410 (March 26, 2012)
(Refrigerators from Korea Final Determination) and
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48277
Commerce to reconsider its selection of
this rate.8 On the other hand, the Court
found that Commerce’s corroboration
and selection of the 1.05 percent rate
from Washers from Korea was
supported by substantial evidence.9
Pursuant to the Remand Order,
Commerce issued its Final
Redetermination, which addressed the
Court’s holdings and revised the CVD
rate for POSCO to 42.61 percent.10 On
September 10, 2018, the CIT sustained
in whole Commerce’s Final
Redetermination.11
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,12 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,13 the
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of
the Act, Commerce must publish a
notice of court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with Commerce’s
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s
September 10, 2018 final judgement,
ordering Commerce to proceed with
replacing POSCO’s 1.64 percent subsidy
rate for programs that were calculated
on the basis of adverse facts available
with the 1.05 percent rate from Washers
from Korea constitutes a final decision
of that court that is not in harmony with
the Final Amended Determination. This
notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
705(c)(1)(B), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum
(Refrigerators from Korea Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
8 Id. at 58.
9 Id. See also Large Residential Washers from the
Republic of Korea: Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination, 77 FR 75975 (December 26,
2012) (Washers from Korea Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum
(Washers from Korea Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
10 See Memorandum POSCO et al., and AK Steel
Corporation, et al., v. United States and Steel
Dynamic Inc., et al.; Consol. Court No. 16–00225,
Slip Op. 18–18 (CIT March 8, 2018); Final Results
of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,
dated June 6, 2018, at 26.
11 See POSCO et al., and AK Steel Corporation,
et al., v. United States and Steel Dynamic Inc., et
al.; Consol. Court No. 16–00225, Slip Op. 18–1115
(CIT September 10, 2018).
12 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
13 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
(Diamond Sawblades).
E:\FR\FM\24SEN1.SGM
24SEN1
48278
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 185 / Monday, September 24, 2018 / Notices
Dated: September 19, 2018.
James Maeder,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations performing the duties of Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2018–20724 Filed 9–21–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–560–832]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin
From Indonesia: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and
Final Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, in Part
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) determines that imports of
polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin
from Indonesia is being sold in the
United States at less than fair value
(LTFV), as provided in section 735 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act).
DATES: Applicable September 24, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Caitlin Monks or Gene Calvert, 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) 482–2670 or (202) 482–3586,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Background
On April 24, 2018 Commerce
published in the Federal Register its
preliminary affirmative determination of
critical circumstances, in part.1 On May
4, 2018, Commerce published in the
Federal Register the preliminary
affirmative determination of sales at
LTFV in the antidumping duty (AD)
investigation of PET resin from
Indonesia.2 Commerce invited
comments from interested parties on the
1 See Antidumping Duty Investigations on
Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from Indonesia,
the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan; Preliminary
Determination of Critical Circumstances, 83 FR
17791 (April 24, 2018) (Preliminary Critical
Circumstances Determination).
2 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from
Brazil: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final
Determination, and Extension of Provisional
Measures, 83 FR 19699 (May 4, 2018) (Preliminary
Determination) and accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum (PDM).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:40 Sep 21, 2018
Jkt 244001
Preliminary Determination.3 The
petitioners 4 and Indorama 5 filed case
and rebuttal briefs.6 A summary of the
events that occurred since Commerce
published the Preliminary
Determination, as well as a full
discussion of the issues raised by
interested parties for this final
determination, may be found in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum.7 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 it is
available to all parties in the Central
Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly at https://enforcement.trade.gov/
frn/. The signed and electronic versions
of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Scope of the Investigation
The product covered by this
investigation is polyethylene
3 Id. at 19700; see also Memorandum, ‘‘Case Brief
Deadline Extension for the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin
from Brazil,’’ dated July 10, 2018.
4 DAK Americas, M&G Polymers USA, LLC, and
Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, America (collectively,
the petitioners).
5 In the Preliminary Determination, in accordance
with section 771(33)(F) of the Act, we found the
following companies affiliated: PT. Indo-Rama
Synthetics Tbk (Indorama Synthetics), Indorama
Ventures Alphapet Holdings, Inc. (Alphapet),
Indorama Ventures Indonesia (Ventures Indonesia),
PT. Indorama Polypet Indonesia (Polypet), and
Indorama Polymers Public Company Ltd.
(Polymers). Further, we collapsed, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.401(f), the following three Indonesian
producers into a single entity: Indorama Synthetics,
Ventures Indonesia, and Polypet, collectively
referred to as Indorama Producers throughout this
final determination. See PDM at 6–11. We have
made no changes to these findings in our final
determination. We received responses from the
Indorama Producers, and their U.S. affiliate,
Alphapet, which we refer to collectively as
Indorama throughout this final determination.
6 See Petitioners’ Case Brief, ‘‘Petitioners’ Case
Brief,’’ dated August 15, 2018 (Petitioners’ Case
Brief); see also Indorama’s Case Brief,
‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin (‘PET Resin’)
from Indonesia: Administrative Case Brief,’’ dated
August 16, 2018 (Indorama’s Case Brief); see also
Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Petitioners’ Rebuttal
Brief,’’ dated August 22, 2018 (Petitioners’ Rebuttal
Brief); see also Indorama’s Revised Rebuttal Brief,
‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin (‘PET Resin’)
from Indonesia: Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated August 24,
2018 (Indorama’s Rebuttal Brief).
7 See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Affirmative
Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigation of Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin
from Indonesia,’’ dated concurrently with, and
hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
terephthalate resin from Indonesia.
Commerce did not receive any scope
comments subsequent to the
Preliminary Determination and,
therefore, the scope has not been revised
since the Preliminary Determination.
For a complete description of the scope
of this investigation, see Appendix I.
Period of Investigation
The POI is July 1, 2016, through June
30, 2017.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the
Act, we conducted the cost and sales
verifications in Indonesia and the
United States between May 4, 2018, and
June 22, 2018. We used standard
verification procedures, including an
examination of relevant accounting and
production records, and original source
documents provided by the
respondents.
Final Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, in Part
For this final determination, as
explained in detail in the accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum, we
determine that critical circumstances
exist for the Indorama Producers, but do
not exist for ‘‘all other’’ producers or
exporters not individually examined.8
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties in this
investigation are addressed in the Issues
and Decision Memorandum, which is
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of
the issues raised is attached to this
notice as Appendix II.
Use of Facts Otherwise Available and
Adverse Inferences
For purposes of this final
determination, Commerce relied on
facts otherwise available with an
adverse inference when calculating the
margin for the Indorama Producers (a
collapsed entity comprised of three
producers),9 pursuant to sections
776(a)(1) and (2)(A)(C)(D) and 776(b) of
the Act. For further information
regarding the use of facts available and
adverse inferences, see the Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
Changes Since the Preliminary
Determination
Based on our analysis of the
comments received and our findings at
verification, we are now relying on facts
available in determining a dumping
margin for the Indorama Producers.
8 See
9 See
E:\FR\FM\24SEN1.SGM
Issues and Decision Memorandum at IV.
supra n.4.
24SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 185 (Monday, September 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48277-48278]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20724]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-580-882]
Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of
Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final
Determination of the Countervailing Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 10, 2018, the United States Court of
International Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the final remand results
pertaining to the countervailing duty (CVD) investigation on certain
cold-rolled steel flat products from the Republic of Korea covering the
period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. The Department of
Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the final judgement in
this case is not in harmony with the Amended Final Determination of the
CVD investigation and that Commerce is amending the Amended Final
Determination with respect to the CVD rate assigned to POSCO.
DATES: Applicable September 20, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yasmin Bordas at (202) 482-3813, AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 29, 2016, Commerce published its Final Determination.\1\
Upon consideration of ministerial error allegations, Commerce issued an
Amended Final Determination and calculated a subsidy rate of 59.72
percent for POSCO.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Determination, 81 FR 49943.
\2\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled
Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Final Affirmative
Determination, 81 FR 49943 (July 29, 2016) (Final Results) and
accompanying Memorandum, entitled ``Issues and Decision Memorandum
for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation
of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of
Korea'' (Issues and Decision Memorandum); see also ``Countervailing
Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel flat Products from
the Republic of Korea: Final Determination Calculation Memorandum
for POSCO, dated July 20, 2016 (POSCO Final Analysis Memorandum). On
September 20, 2016, the Commerce published its amended final results
upon consideration of various ministerial error allegations. See
Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, India, and the
Republic of Korea: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Countervailing Duty Order (the Republic of Korea)
and Countervailing Duty Orders (Brazil and India), 81 FR 64436
(September 20, 2016) (Amended Final Results); see also ``Response to
Ministerial Error Comments Filed by Hyundai Steel Co. Ltd. and
POSCO,'' dated August 24, 2016 (Ministerial Error Memo); and
``Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel
Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Amended Final
Determination Calculation Memorandum for POSCO,'' dated August 24,
2016 (POSCO Amended Final Analysis Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March, 8, 2018, the CIT remanded various aspects of the Amended
Final Determination to Commerce.\3\ In its Remand Order, the Court held
that ``substantial evidence supports Commerce's decision to apply facts
available.'' \4\ The Court held that the record demonstrated that POSCO
``withheld information, failed to timely provide information, and
impeded the proceeding,'' and that POSCO's ``failure to supply the
requested information'' reflected a failure to act to the best of its
ability.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See POSCO et al., and AK Steel Corporation, et al., v.
United States and Steel Dynamic Inc., et al., Consol. Court No. 16-
00225, Slip Op. 18-18 (CIT 2018) (Remand Order).
\4\ See Remand Order at 26.
\5\ Id. at 26-27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the Court also held that Commerce had not conducted an
``evaluation of the specific situation,'' under the relatively new
statutory language of section 776(d)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act) and had not explained ``why this case justified its
selection of the highest rates.'' \6\ In addition, the Court concluded
that the 1.64 percent rate from Refrigerators from Korea was ``derived
from estimates Commerce made on the basis of an adverse inference,''
and, therefore, was not corroborated, under section 776(c) of the
Act.\7\ The Court, therefore, instructed Commerce to reconsider its
selection of this rate.\8\ On the other hand, the Court found that
Commerce's corroboration and selection of the 1.05 percent rate from
Washers from Korea was supported by substantial evidence.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Id. at 49.
\7\ Id. at 57-58. See also Bottom Mount Combination
Refrigerator-Freezers from the Republic of Korea: Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination, 77 FR 17410 (March 26, 2012)
(Refrigerators from Korea Final Determination) and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum (Refrigerators from Korea Issues and
Decision Memorandum).
\8\ Id. at 58.
\9\ Id. See also Large Residential Washers from the Republic of
Korea: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 77 FR
75975 (December 26, 2012) (Washers from Korea Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (Washers from Korea
Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Remand Order, Commerce issued its Final
Redetermination, which addressed the Court's holdings and revised the
CVD rate for POSCO to 42.61 percent.\10\ On September 10, 2018, the CIT
sustained in whole Commerce's Final Redetermination.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Memorandum POSCO et al., and AK Steel Corporation, et
al., v. United States and Steel Dynamic Inc., et al.; Consol. Court
No. 16-00225, Slip Op. 18-18 (CIT March 8, 2018); Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, dated June 6, 2018, at 26.
\11\ See POSCO et al., and AK Steel Corporation, et al., v.
United States and Steel Dynamic Inc., et al.; Consol. Court No. 16-
00225, Slip Op. 18-1115 (CIT September 10, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\12\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\13\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that,
pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Act, Commerce must publish a notice
of court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with Commerce's
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's September 10, 2018 final
judgement, ordering Commerce to proceed with replacing POSCO's 1.64
percent subsidy rate for programs that were calculated on the basis of
adverse facts available with the 1.05 percent rate from Washers from
Korea constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony
with the Final Amended Determination. This notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\13\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e)(1), 705(c)(1)(B), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
[[Page 48278]]
Dated: September 19, 2018.
James Maeder,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations performing the duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2018-20724 Filed 9-21-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
