Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Determination in Less Than Fair Value Investigation; Notice of Amended Final Determination Pursuant to Court Decision; and Notice of Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order, in Part, 877-878 [2020-00050]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 5 / Wednesday, January 8, 2020 / Notices
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
Legal Authority: Export Control
Reform Act 4812(b)(7) and
4814(b)(1)(B).
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
IV. Request for Comments
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel
Products From India: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With
Amended Final Determination in Less
Than Fair Value Investigation; Notice
of Amended Final Determination
Pursuant to Court Decision; and Notice
of Revocation of Antidumping Duty
Order, in Part
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of
the Chief Information Officer, Commerce
Department.
[FR Doc. 2020–00069 Filed 1–7–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–07–P
International Trade Administration
[A–533–863]
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 18, 2019, the
United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) sustained the Department of
Commerce’s (Commerce) remand
redetermination pertaining to the lessthan-fair-value (LTFV) investigation of
certain corrosion-resistant steel
products (corrosion-resistant steel) from
India. Commerce is notifying the public
that the final judgment in this case is
not in harmony with Commerce’s
amended final determination in the
LTFV investigation of corrosionresistant steel from India. Pursuant to
the CIT’s final judgment, Uttam Galva
Steels Ltd. (Uttam Galva) is being
excluded from the order.
DATES: Applicable December 28, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD Operations,
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Background
The litigation in Uttam Galva Steels
Limited v. United States relates to
Commerce’s final determination in the
LTFV investigation covering corrosionresistant steel from India.1 In its
Amended Final Determination and
Order, Commerce reached affirmative
1 Court No. 16–00162, Slip Op. 2019–168 (CIT
December 18, 2019); see Certain Corrosion-Resistant
Steel Products from India: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Negative
Determination of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR
35329 (June 2, 2016), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum; Certain Corrosion-Resistant
Steel Products from India, Italy, the People’s
Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and
Taiwan: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping
Determination for India and Taiwan, and
Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 48390 (July 25,
2016) (Amended Final Determination and Order);
see also Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products
from India, Italy, the People’s Republic of China,
the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Notice of
Correction to the Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR
58475 (August 25, 2016).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Jan 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
2 In the underlying investigation, we found Uttam
Galva Steels Limited and its affiliated companies
Uttam Value Steels Limited, Atlantis International
Services Company Ltd., Uttam Galva Steels,
Netherlands, B.V., and Uttam Galva Steels (BVI)
Limited (collectively, Uttam Galva), to comprise a
single entity. See Final Determination, 81 FR at
35330 n.13.
3 Id.
4 See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd v. United States, 311
F. Supp. 3d 1345 (CIT 2018).
5 Id., 311 F. Supp. at 1357.
6 See ‘‘Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Uttam Galva Steels Limited v.
United States, Court No. 16–00162, Slip Op. 18–44
(CIT 2018),’’ dated August 16, 2018 (Remand
Results).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
877
determinations for mandatory
respondents Uttam Galva,2 as well as
JSW Steel Ltd. and its wholly-owned
affiliate JSW Steel Coated Products
Limited (collectively, JSW).3 Uttam
Galva appealed the Amended Final
Determination and Order to the CIT,
and on April 18, 2018, the CIT
remanded Commerce’s Amended Final
Determination and Order.4 In its
opinion, the CIT found that Commerce’s
duty drawback calculation was
unreasonable and not in accordance
with the law and instructed Commerce
to recalculate Uttam Galva’s duty
drawback adjustment.5
On August 16, 2018, Commerce filed
Remand Results with the CIT,
recalculating Uttam Galva’s duty
drawback adjustment.6 On March 12,
2019, the CIT remanded the Remand
Results to Commerce for a second
redetermination.7 On May 29, 2019,
Commerce filed its Second Remand
Results with the CIT, wherein it revised
its duty drawback calculation for a
second time.8 On December 18, 2019,
the CIT sustained Commerce’s Second
Remand Results.9
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,10 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,11 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 18, 2019 final judgment
sustaining Commerce’s Second Remand
Results constitutes a final decision of
the Court that is not in harmony with
Commerce’s Amended Final
Determination and Order. This notice is
published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
7 See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. v. United States,
374 F. Supp. 3d 1360 (CIT 2019).
8 See ‘‘Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Uttam Galva Steels Limited v.
United States, Court No. 16–00162, Slip Op. 19–34
(CIT 2019),’’ dated May 29, 2019 (Second Remand
Results).
9 See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. v. United States,
Court No. 16–00162, Slip Op. 2019–168 (CIT
December 18, 2019).
10 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337,
341 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
11 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
(Diamond Sawblades).
E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM
08JAN1
878
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 5 / Wednesday, January 8, 2020 / Notices
Amended Final Determination
Final Determination and Amended
Final Determination and Order with
respect to Uttam Galva and the allothers rate. The revised weighted-
Because there is now a final court
decision, Commerce is amending the
average dumping margins for Uttam
Galva and all other exporters for the
period April 1, 2014 through March 31,
2015, are as follows:
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
Exporter/producer
Uttam Galva Steels Limited; Uttam Value Steels Limited; Atlantis International Services Company Ltd.; Uttam Galva Steels,
Netherlands, B.V.; Uttam Galva Steels (BVI) Limited .....................................................................................................................
All Others .............................................................................................................................................................................................
Partial Exclusion From Antidumping
Duty Order
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Pursuant to section 735(a)(4) of the
Act, Commerce ‘‘shall disregard any
weighted average dumping margin that
is de minimis as defined in section
733(b)(3) of the Act.’’ 13 Furthermore,
section 735(c)(2) of the Act states that
‘‘the investigation shall be terminated
upon publication of that negative
determination’’ and Commerce shall
‘‘terminate the suspension of
liquidation’’ and ‘‘release any bond or
other security, and refund any cash
deposit.’’ 14 As a result of this amended
final determination, in which
Commerce has calculated an estimated
weighted-average dumping margin of
0.00 percent for Uttam Galva, Commerce
is hereby excluding merchandise
produced and exported by Uttam Galva
from the antidumping duty order.15
Accordingly, Commerce will direct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
release any bonds or other security and
refund cash deposits pertaining to any
suspended entries from Uttam Galva.
This exclusion does not apply to any
other companies (except those that
comprise a single entity with Uttam
Galva, which are listed in the table
above).16
However, pursuant to Timken, the
suspension of liquidation must continue
during the pendency of the appeals
process. Thus, we will instruct CBP to
suspend liquidation of all unliquidated
12 As explained in the Second Remand Results,
because Uttam Galva’s antidumping duty margin is
now 0.00 percent, its rate is no longer factored in
the calculation of the all-others rate and the rate
calculated for JSW is now the all-others rate.
Further, although the dumping margin calculated
for JSW and published in the Amended Final
Determination and Order continues to be 4.43
percent, the adjustment for export subsidies results
in a cash deposit rate of 0.47 percent. See Second
Remand Results at 17.
13 Section 733(b)(3) of the Act defines de minimis
dumping margin as ‘‘less than 2 percent ad valorem
or the equivalent specific rate for the subject
merchandise.’’
14 See sections 735(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act.
15 See Second Remand Results at 22.
16 See supra, fn. 2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:18 Jan 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
entries from Uttam Galva at a cash
deposit rate of 0.00 percent which are
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption after December 28,
2019, which is ten days after the CIT’s
final decision, in accordance with
section 516A of the Act.17 If the CIT’s
ruling is not appealed, or if appealed
and upheld, Commerce will instruct
CBP to terminate the suspension of
liquidation and to liquidate entries
produced and exported by Uttam Galva
without regard to antidumping duties.
As a result of the exclusion, Commerce
will not initiate any new administrative
reviews of Uttam Galva’s entries
pursuant to the antidumping duty
order.18
At this time, Commerce remains
enjoined by CIT order from liquidating
entries that: (1) Were produced and
exported by Uttam Galva Steels Limited,
and were entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
July 1, 2017, up to and including June
30, 2018; and (2) were produced and/or
exported by Uttam Value Steels Limited,
and were entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
July 1, 2017, up to and including June
30, 2018. These entries will remain
enjoined pursuant to the terms of the
injunction during the pendency of any
appeals process.
17 See, e.g., Drill Pipe from the People’s Republic
of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony
with International Trade Commission’s Injury
Determination, Revocation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Orders Pursuant to Court
Decision, and Discontinuation of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review, 79 FR 78037, 78038
(December 29, 2014); High Pressure Steel Cylinders
From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final
Determination in Less Than Fair Value
Investigation, Notice of Amended Final
Determination Pursuant to Court Decision, Notice of
Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order in Part, and
Discontinuation of Fifth Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 82 FR 46758, 46760
(October 6, 2017).
18 See Amended Final Determination and Order.
Currently there are no ongoing administrative
reviews of this order.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
0.00
12 4.43
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(c)(1) and
(e) of the Act.
Dated: December 30, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020–00050 Filed 1–7–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–058]
Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing
of Carbon and Alloy Steel From the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Rescission of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2017–2019
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) is rescinding the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain colddrawn mechanical tubing of carbon and
alloy steel (cold-drawn mechanical
tubing) from the People’s Republic of
China (China) for the period November
22, 2017 through May 31, 2019.
DATES: Applicable January 8, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles Doss, 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) 482–4474.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On June 3, 2019, Commerce published
a notice of opportunity to request an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on cold-drawn
mechanical tubing from China for the
period November 22, 2017, through May
E:\FR\FM\08JAN1.SGM
08JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 877-878]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00050]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-863]
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Determination in Less
Than Fair Value Investigation; Notice of Amended Final Determination
Pursuant to Court Decision; and Notice of Revocation of Antidumping
Duty Order, in Part
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 18, 2019, the United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) sustained the Department of Commerce's (Commerce) remand
redetermination pertaining to the less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation of certain corrosion-resistant steel products (corrosion-
resistant steel) from India. Commerce is notifying the public that the
final judgment in this case is not in harmony with Commerce's amended
final determination in the LTFV investigation of corrosion-resistant
steel from India. Pursuant to the CIT's final judgment, Uttam Galva
Steels Ltd. (Uttam Galva) is being excluded from the order.
DATES: Applicable December 28, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD Operations,
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The litigation in Uttam Galva Steels Limited v. United States
relates to Commerce's final determination in the LTFV investigation
covering corrosion-resistant steel from India.\1\ In its Amended Final
Determination and Order, Commerce reached affirmative determinations
for mandatory respondents Uttam Galva,\2\ as well as JSW Steel Ltd. and
its wholly-owned affiliate JSW Steel Coated Products Limited
(collectively, JSW).\3\ Uttam Galva appealed the Amended Final
Determination and Order to the CIT, and on April 18, 2018, the CIT
remanded Commerce's Amended Final Determination and Order.\4\ In its
opinion, the CIT found that Commerce's duty drawback calculation was
unreasonable and not in accordance with the law and instructed Commerce
to recalculate Uttam Galva's duty drawback adjustment.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Court No. 16-00162, Slip Op. 2019-168 (CIT December 18,
2019); see Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India:
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final
Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR 35329 (June
2, 2016), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum; Certain
Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's
Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan: Amended Final
Affirmative Antidumping Determination for India and Taiwan, and
Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 48390 (July 25, 2016) (Amended Final
Determination and Order); see also Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel
Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the
Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Notice of Correction to the
Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 58475 (August 25, 2016).
\2\ In the underlying investigation, we found Uttam Galva Steels
Limited and its affiliated companies Uttam Value Steels Limited,
Atlantis International Services Company Ltd., Uttam Galva Steels,
Netherlands, B.V., and Uttam Galva Steels (BVI) Limited
(collectively, Uttam Galva), to comprise a single entity. See Final
Determination, 81 FR at 35330 n.13.
\3\ Id.
\4\ See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd v. United States, 311 F. Supp. 3d
1345 (CIT 2018).
\5\ Id., 311 F. Supp. at 1357.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 16, 2018, Commerce filed Remand Results with the CIT,
recalculating Uttam Galva's duty drawback adjustment.\6\ On March 12,
2019, the CIT remanded the Remand Results to Commerce for a second
redetermination.\7\ On May 29, 2019, Commerce filed its Second Remand
Results with the CIT, wherein it revised its duty drawback calculation
for a second time.\8\ On December 18, 2019, the CIT sustained
Commerce's Second Remand Results.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Uttam Galva Steels Limited v. United States, Court No. 16-
00162, Slip Op. 18-44 (CIT 2018),'' dated August 16, 2018 (Remand
Results).
\7\ See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. v. United States, 374 F. Supp.
3d 1360 (CIT 2019).
\8\ See ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Uttam Galva Steels Limited v. United States, Court No. 16-
00162, Slip Op. 19-34 (CIT 2019),'' dated May 29, 2019 (Second
Remand Results).
\9\ See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 16-
00162, Slip Op. 2019-168 (CIT December 18, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\10\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\11\ 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 18, 2019 final judgment sustaining
Commerce's Second Remand Results constitutes a final decision of the
Court that is not in harmony with Commerce's Amended Final
Determination and Order. This notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed.
Cir. 1990) (Timken).
\11\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 878]]
Amended Final Determination
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending
the Final Determination and Amended Final Determination and Order with
respect to Uttam Galva and the all-others rate. The revised weighted-
average dumping margins for Uttam Galva and all other exporters for the
period April 1, 2014 through March 31, 2015, are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter/producer dumping margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uttam Galva Steels Limited; Uttam Value Steels Limited; 0.00
Atlantis International Services Company Ltd.; Uttam
Galva Steels, Netherlands, B.V.; Uttam Galva Steels
(BVI) Limited..........................................
All Others.............................................. \12\ 4.43
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Partial Exclusion From Antidumping Duty Order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ As explained in the Second Remand Results, because Uttam
Galva's antidumping duty margin is now 0.00 percent, its rate is no
longer factored in the calculation of the all-others rate and the
rate calculated for JSW is now the all-others rate. Further,
although the dumping margin calculated for JSW and published in the
Amended Final Determination and Order continues to be 4.43 percent,
the adjustment for export subsidies results in a cash deposit rate
of 0.47 percent. See Second Remand Results at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to section 735(a)(4) of the Act, Commerce ``shall
disregard any weighted average dumping margin that is de minimis as
defined in section 733(b)(3) of the Act.'' \13\ Furthermore, section
735(c)(2) of the Act states that ``the investigation shall be
terminated upon publication of that negative determination'' and
Commerce shall ``terminate the suspension of liquidation'' and
``release any bond or other security, and refund any cash deposit.''
\14\ As a result of this amended final determination, in which Commerce
has calculated an estimated weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00
percent for Uttam Galva, Commerce is hereby excluding merchandise
produced and exported by Uttam Galva from the antidumping duty
order.\15\ Accordingly, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to release any bonds or other security and refund cash
deposits pertaining to any suspended entries from Uttam Galva. This
exclusion does not apply to any other companies (except those that
comprise a single entity with Uttam Galva, which are listed in the
table above).\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Section 733(b)(3) of the Act defines de minimis dumping
margin as ``less than 2 percent ad valorem or the equivalent
specific rate for the subject merchandise.''
\14\ See sections 735(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act.
\15\ See Second Remand Results at 22.
\16\ See supra, fn. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, pursuant to Timken, the suspension of liquidation must
continue during the pendency of the appeals process. Thus, we will
instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of all unliquidated entries from
Uttam Galva at a cash deposit rate of 0.00 percent which are entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after December 28, 2019,
which is ten days after the CIT's final decision, in accordance with
section 516A of the Act.\17\ If the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or if
appealed and upheld, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the
suspension of liquidation and to liquidate entries produced and
exported by Uttam Galva without regard to antidumping duties. As a
result of the exclusion, Commerce will not initiate any new
administrative reviews of Uttam Galva's entries pursuant to the
antidumping duty order.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See, e.g., Drill Pipe from the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with International Trade
Commission's Injury Determination, Revocation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Orders Pursuant to Court Decision, and
Discontinuation of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 79 FR
78037, 78038 (December 29, 2014); High Pressure Steel Cylinders From
the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony With Final Determination in Less Than Fair Value
Investigation, Notice of Amended Final Determination Pursuant to
Court Decision, Notice of Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order in
Part, and Discontinuation of Fifth Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 82 FR 46758, 46760 (October 6, 2017).
\18\ See Amended Final Determination and Order. Currently there
are no ongoing administrative reviews of this order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from
liquidating entries that: (1) Were produced and exported by Uttam Galva
Steels Limited, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after July 1, 2017, up to and including June 30,
2018; and (2) were produced and/or exported by Uttam Value Steels
Limited, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption
on or after July 1, 2017, up to and including June 30, 2018. These
entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction
during the pendency of any appeals process.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c)(1) and (e) of the Act.
Dated: December 30, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-00050 Filed 1-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P