Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of Review and Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 66-67 [2019-28327]
Download as PDF
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
66
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2020 / Notices
initiated does not qualify for a separate
rate, Commerce will issue a final
decision indicating that the company in
question is part of the NME entity.
However, in that situation, because no
review of the NME entity was
conducted, the NME entity’s entries
were not subject to the review and the
rate for the NME entity is not subject to
change as a result of that review
(although the rate for the individual
exporter may change as a function of the
finding that the exporter is part of the
NME entity). Following initiation of an
antidumping administrative review
when there is no review requested of the
NME entity, Commerce will instruct
CBP to liquidate entries for all exporters
not named in the initiation notice,
including those that were suspended at
the NME entity rate.
All requests must be filed
electronically in Enforcement and
Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS) on
Enforcement and Compliance’s ACCESS
website at https://access.trade.gov.6
Further, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.303(f)(l)(i), a copy of each request
must be served on the petitioner and
each exporter or producer specified in
the request.
Commerce will publish in the Federal
Register a notice of ‘‘Initiation of
Administrative Review of Antidumping
or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding,
or Suspended Investigation’’ for
requests received by the last day of
January 2020. If Commerce does not
receive, by the last day of January 2020,
a request for review of entries covered
by an order, finding, or suspended
investigation listed in this notice and for
the period identified above, Commerce
will instruct CBP to assess antidumping
or countervailing duties on those entries
at a rate equal to the cash deposit of
estimated antidumping or
countervailing duties required on those
entries at the time of entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption and to continue to collect
the cash deposit previously ordered.
For the first administrative review of
any order, there will be no assessment
of antidumping or countervailing duties
on entries of subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption during the relevant
provisional-measures ‘‘gap’’ period of
the order, if such a gap period is
applicable to the period of review.
6 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR
39263 (July 6, 2011).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 31, 2019
Jkt 250001
This notice is not required by statute
but is published as a service to the
international trading community.
Dated: December 18, 2019.
James Maeder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2019–28342 Filed 12–31–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony With the Final Results of
Review and Amended Final Results of
the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2014–2015
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 16, 2019, the
United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) sustained the final remand
redetermination pertaining to the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof from the
People’s Republic of China covering the
period November 1, 2014 through
October 31, 2015. The Department of
Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the
public that the CIT’s final judgment in
this case is not in harmony with the
final results of the administrative review
and that Commerce is amending the
final results with respect to certain
respondents eligible for separate rates.
Applicable date: December 26, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, 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 or (202) 482–1690,
respectively.
AGENCY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 12, 2017, Commerce
published the Final Results, in which
we accepted an alternative sales
identification methodology for Bosun
Tools Co., Ltd. (Bosun), calculated a
margin for Bosun, and assigned the
margin for Bosun to the non-selected
separate rate respondents.1 On October
1 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from
the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23, 2018, the CIT remanded the Final
Results to Commerce to: (1) Further
clarify or reconsider Commerce’s
conclusion that Bosun acted to the best
of its ability in responding to
Commerce’s requests for information;
and (2) further explain Commerce’s
selection of surrogate values for copper
powder and copper iron clab.2
In the final remand redetermination,
we found that Bosun had not acted to
the best of its ability in responding to
our request for information and
determined Bosun’s margin entirely on
the basis of the facts available with an
adverse inference (AFA). Because we
applied AFA to Bosun, the issue
concerning the surrogate value for
copper power and copper iron clab was
moot.3 On December 16, 2019, the CIT
sustained our final remand
redetermination in its entirety.4
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken Co. v.
United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed.
Cir. 1990) (Timken), as clarified by
Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir.
2010), the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit held
that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
Commerce must publish a notice of a
court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’
with a Commerce determination and
must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision.
The CIT’s December 16, 2019, final
judgment sustaining the final remand
redetermination constitutes the CIT’s
final decision which is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with the Final Results. This
notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, Commerce will continue
the suspension of liquidation of the
subject merchandise pending expiration
of the period to appeal or, if appealed,
pending a final and conclusive court
decision.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court
decision, Commerce is amending the
Final Results with respect to Bosun and
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014–
2015, 82 FR 26912 (June 12, 2017) (Final Results).
2 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 17–00167, Slip
Op. 18–146 (CIT Oct. 23, 2018).
3 See Final Remand Redetermination dated April
17, 2019, pursuant to Diamond Sawblades
Manufacturers’ Coalition v. United States, Court
No. 17–00167, Slip Op. 18–146 (CIT Oct. 23, 2018),
available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/
18-146.pdf.
4 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 17–00167, Slip
Op. 19–157 (CIT Dec. 16, 2019).
E:\FR\FM\02JAN1.SGM
02JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2020 / Notices
the non-selected separate rate
respondents as follows:
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
Exporter
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd ..................
Chengdu Huifeng Diamond
Tools Co., Ltd 5 .......................
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 ....................
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 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 ...........................................
82.05
final and conclusive court decision,
Commerce will instruct the U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess antidumping duties on
unliquidated entries of subject
merchandise based on the revised rates
listed above, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(c)(2).
Cash Deposit Requirements
As the cash deposit rate for Danyang
Hantronic Import & Export Co., Ltd., has
82.05
not been subject to subsequent
82.05 administrative reviews, Commerce will
issue revised cash deposit instructions
82.05 to CBP adjusting the rate from 6.19
percent to 82.05 percent, effective
82.05 December 26, 2019. For all other
respondents listed above, because the
82.05 cash deposit rates have been updated in
subsequent administrative reviews,7 we
82.05
will not update their cash deposit rates
82.05 as a result of these amended final
results.
82.05
82.05
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
82.05 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
82.05
82.05
82.05
82.05
82.05
Dated: December 27, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019–28327 Filed 12–31–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
82.05
82.05
82.05
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
82.05
82.05
Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset)
Reviews
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
82.05 Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Tariff
In the event the CIT’s ruling is not
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the
appealed or, if appealed, upheld by a
Department of Commerce (Commerce) is
82.05
AGENCY:
automatically initiating the five-year
reviews (Sunset Reviews) of the
antidumping and countervailing duty
(AD/CVD) order(s) listed below. The
International Trade Commission (the
Commission) is publishing concurrently
with this notice its notice of Institution
of Five-Year Reviews which covers the
same order(s).
DATES: Applicable January 1, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Commerce official identified in the
Initiation of Review section below at
AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue,
NW, Washington, DC 20230. For
information from the Commission
contact Mary Messer, Office of
Investigations, U.S. International Trade
Commission at (202) 205–3193.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Commerce’s procedures for the
conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth
in its Procedures for Conducting FiveYear (Sunset) Reviews of Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR
13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR
62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on
methodological or analytical issues
relevant to Commerce’s conduct of
Sunset Reviews is set forth in
Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation
of the Weighted-Average Dumping
Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain
Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final
Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14,
2012).
Initiation of Review
In accordance with section 751(c) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are
initiating the Sunset Reviews of the
following antidumping and
countervailing duty order(s):
DOC Case No.
ITC Case No.
Country
Product
A–570–880 .....
A–570–010 .....
731–TA–1020
731–TA–1246
China .......................
China .......................
C–570–011 ....
701–TA–511 ..
China .......................
A–570–873 .....
731–TA–986 ..
China .......................
Barium Carbonate (3rd Review) ...............
Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products
(1st Review).
Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products
(1st Review).
Ferrovanadium (3rd Review) ....................
5 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from
the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review,
82 FR 60177 (December 19, 2017). In this changed
circumstances review, Commerce determined that
Chengdu Huifeng New Material Technology Co.,
Ltd. is the successor-in-interest to Chengdu Huifeng
Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
6 Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.,
is the successor-in-interest to Wuhan Wanbang
Laser Diamond Tools Co. See Diamond Sawblades
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 31, 2019
Jkt 250001
Commerce contact
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 For Bosun, Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing
Co., Ltd., Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial
Co., Ltd., and Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond
Tools Co., Ltd., see Diamond Sawblades and Parts
Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2015–2016, 83 FR 17527, 17528 (April 20,
2018). For all other respondents listed above, see
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
67
Matthew Renkey (202) 482–2312.
Matthew Renkey (202) 482–2312.
Jacqueline Arrowsmith (202) 482–5255.
Mark Kolberg (202) 482–1785.
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the
People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016–
2017, 83 FR 39673, 39674, n.10 (August 10, 2018),
unchanged in Diamond Sawblades and Parts
Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2016–2017, 83 FR 64331 (December 14,
2018).
E:\FR\FM\02JAN1.SGM
02JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 1 (Thursday, January 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66-67]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28327]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of
China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results
of Review and Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2014-2015
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 16, 2019, the United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) sustained the final remand redetermination pertaining to
the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof from the People's Republic of China
covering the period November 1, 2014 through October 31, 2015. The
Department of Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the
CIT's final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the final
results of the administrative review and that Commerce is amending the
final results with respect to certain respondents eligible for separate
rates.
Applicable date: December 26, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, 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 or (202) 482-1690,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 12, 2017, Commerce published the Final Results, in which we
accepted an alternative sales identification methodology for Bosun
Tools Co., Ltd. (Bosun), calculated a margin for Bosun, and assigned
the margin for Bosun to the non-selected separate rate respondents.\1\
On October 23, 2018, the CIT remanded the Final Results to Commerce to:
(1) Further clarify or reconsider Commerce's conclusion that Bosun
acted to the best of its ability in responding to Commerce's requests
for information; and (2) further explain Commerce's selection of
surrogate values for copper powder and copper iron clab.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2014-2015, 82 FR 26912 (June 12, 2017) (Final Results).
\2\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United
States, Court No. 17-00167, Slip Op. 18-146 (CIT Oct. 23, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the final remand redetermination, we found that Bosun had not
acted to the best of its ability in responding to our request for
information and determined Bosun's margin entirely on the basis of the
facts available with an adverse inference (AFA). Because we applied AFA
to Bosun, the issue concerning the surrogate value for copper power and
copper iron clab was moot.\3\ On December 16, 2019, the CIT sustained
our final remand redetermination in its entirety.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Final Remand Redetermination dated April 17, 2019,
pursuant to Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United
States, Court No. 17-00167, Slip Op. 18-146 (CIT Oct. 23, 2018),
available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/18-146.pdf.
\4\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United
States, Court No. 17-00167, Slip Op. 19-157 (CIT Dec. 16, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs.
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010), the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to
section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
Commerce must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in
harmony'' with a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of
entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's December 16,
2019, final judgment sustaining the final remand redetermination
constitutes the CIT's final decision which is not ``in harmony'' with
the Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, Commerce will continue
the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending
expiration of the period to appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending
the Final Results with respect to Bosun and
[[Page 67]]
the non-selected separate rate respondents as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd........................................ 82.05
Chengdu Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd \5\.................. 82.05
Danyang Hantronic Import & Export Co., Ltd.................. 82.05
Danyang Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd....... 82.05
Danyang Like Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd................... 82.05
Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd................... 82.05
Danyang Weiwang Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd................ 82.05
Guilin Tebon Superhard Material Co., Ltd.................... 82.05
Hangzhou Deer King Industrial and Trading Co., Ltd.......... 82.05
Hangzhou Kingburg Import & Export Co., Ltd.................. 82.05
Huzhou Gu's Import & Export Co., Ltd........................ 82.05
Jiangsu Inter-China Group Corporation....................... 82.05
Jiangsu Youhe Tool Manufacturer Co., Ltd.................... 82.05
Qingyuan Shangtai Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.................... 82.05
Quanzhou Zhongzhi Diamond Tool Co., Ltd..................... 82.05
Rizhao Hein Saw Co., Ltd.................................... 82.05
Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.................. 82.05
Shanghai Jingquan Industrial Trade Co., Ltd................. 82.05
Sino Tools Co., Ltd......................................... 82.05
Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd............ 82.05
Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd \6\.............. 82.05
Xiamen ZL Diamond Technology Co., Ltd....................... 82.05
Zhejiang Wanli Tools Group Co., Ltd......................... 82.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed,
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce will instruct
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping
duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise based on the
revised rates listed above, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 82 FR 60177 (December 19, 2017). In this
changed circumstances review, Commerce determined that Chengdu
Huifeng New Material Technology Co., Ltd. is the successor-in-
interest to Chengdu Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
\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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
As the cash deposit rate for Danyang Hantronic Import & Export Co.,
Ltd., has not been subject to subsequent administrative reviews,
Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to CBP adjusting
the rate from 6.19 percent to 82.05 percent, effective December 26,
2019. For all other respondents listed above, because the cash deposit
rates have been updated in subsequent administrative reviews,\7\ we
will not update their cash deposit rates as a result of these amended
final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For Bosun, Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd.,
Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd., and Wuhan Wanbang
Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd., see Diamond Sawblades and Parts
Thereof from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 83 FR 17527,
17528 (April 20, 2018). For all other respondents listed above, see
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of
China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 39673, 39674, n.10 (August 10, 2018),
unchanged in Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 64331 (December 14, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 27, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-28327 Filed 12-31-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P