Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Anti-Circumvention Inquiry, 9737-9739 [2020-03362]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 34 / Thursday, February 20, 2020 / Notices Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum, Commerce preliminarily applied AFA to the China-wide entity, pursuant to sections 776(a) and 776(b) of the Act, because the China-wide entity failed to cooperate to the best of its ability by failing to provide necessary information requested by Commerce.10 In the Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum, Commerce determined a weighted-average dumping margin for the China-wide entity of 56.54 percent.11 As noted above, no interested party disputed Commerce’s preliminary or post-preliminary findings. As there are no changes from the Preliminary Results or Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum, Commerce finds that there is no reason to modify its analysis for these final results. Accordingly, no decision memorandum accompanies this Federal Register notice. For further details of the issues already addressed in this review, see the Preliminary Results or the Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum.12 In these final results of review, we continued to treat all 28 exporters subject to this review as part of the China-wide entity.13 The weightedaverage dumping margin for the Chinawide entity is 56.54 percent.14 Assessment Rates Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), Commerce has determined, and U.S Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of these final results of review. For the China-wide entity, as well as the companies identified as part of the China-wide entity, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties at an ad valorem rate of 56.54 percent to all unliquidated entries of subject merchandise during the POR which were produced or exported by the China-wide entity, including the companies noted in the Appendix. Cash Deposit Requirements For all shipments of subject merchandise from China, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication 10 See lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES 11 See Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 7. 12 See Preliminary Results; see also PostPreliminary Decision Memorandum. 13 See Preliminary Results; Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum and Appendix. In fact, there are no companies which are currently eligible for a separate rate under this antidumping duty order. 14 See Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 7. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:48 Feb 19, 2020 Jkt 250001 date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin for the China-wide entity (i.e., 56.54 percent). These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Disclosure Normally, Commerce discloses to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with final results within five days of its public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). However, because Commerce applied total AFA to the China-wide entity in the final results of this administrative review in accordance with section 776 of the Act, and the applied AFA rate is based solely on a rate applied in an earlier segment of this proceeding, there are no calculations to disclose. Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties This notice also 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 POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as a 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), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 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 which is subject to sanction. Notification to Interested Parties We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative review and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act. PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 9737 Dated: February 11, 2020. Jeffrey I. Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—List of Companies/Entities Covered by This Review 1. China-Wide Entity 2. Anhui Fresh Taste International Trade Co., Ltd. 3. Baoji Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. 4. Blu Logistics (China) Co., Ltd. 5. Bonroy Group Limited 6. Forehigh Trade and Industry Co., Ltd. 7. Fujian Province Jianyang Wuyi MSG Co., Ltd. 8. Golden Banyan Foodstuffs Industry Co., Ltd. 9. Henan Lotus Flower Gourmet Powder Co. 10. Hong Kong Sungiven International Food Co., Limited 11. Hulunbeier Northeast Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. 12. K&S Industry Limited 13. King Cheong Hong International 14. Langfang Meihua Bio-Technology Co., Ltd. 15. Liangshan Linghua Biotechnology Co., Ltd. 16. Lotus Health Industry Holding Group 17. Meihua Group International Trading (Hong Kong) Limited 18. Meihua Holdings Group Co., Ltd., Bazhou Branch 19. Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co., Ltd. 20. Pudong Prime Int’l Logistics, Inc. 21. Qinhuangdao Xingtai Trade Co., Ltd. 22. S.D. Linghua M.S.G. Incorporated Co. 23. Shandong Linghua Monosodium Glutamate Incorporated Company 24. Shandong Qilu Biotechnology Group 25. Shanghai Totole Food Ltd. 26. Shijiazhuang Standard Imp & Exp Co., Ltd. 27. Sunrise (HK) International Enterprise Limited 28. Tongliao Meihua Biological Sci-Tech Co., Ltd. 29. Zhejiang Medicines & Health [FR Doc. 2020–03368 Filed 2–19–20; 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: Final Determination of AntiCircumvention Inquiry Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Protech Diamond Tools Inc. (Protech) is circumventing the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM 20FEN1 9738 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 34 / Thursday, February 20, 2020 / Notices thereof (diamond sawblades) from the People’s Republic of China (China). DATES: Applicable February 20, 2020. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun, 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES Background On October 30, 2019, Commerce published the preliminary affirmative determination of circumvention of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades from China.1 We received no case or rebuttal briefs with respect to the Preliminary Determination. On November 29, 2019, in response to the Preliminary Determination, Protech filed a letter which contained untimely filed new factual information. On December 17, 2019, we rejected Protech’s letter in response to the Preliminary Determination because it contained untimely filed new factual information, and we provided Protech an opportunity to re-submit its letter with the redaction of untimely filed new factual information.2 On December 18, 2019, Protech submitted two letters in response to the Preliminary Determination, which still contained untimely filed new factual information that we had identified in our earlier December 17, 2019 rejection letter. On December 26, 2019, we rejected Protech’s two letters because they contained untimely filed new factual information, and we provided Protech with another opportunity to re-submit its letter in response to the Preliminary Determination after the redaction of all untimely filed new factual information.3 Protech did not re-submit its response to the Preliminary Determination by the established deadline.4 Protech also 1 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Circumvention, 84 FR 58130 (October 30, 2019) (Preliminary Determination). 2 See Commerce’s Letter, ‘‘Rejection of Response to Preliminary Determination’’ dated December 17, 2019, which explains Commerce’s reasons for rejecting Protech’s letter in response to the Preliminary Determination. 3 See Commerce’s Letter, ‘‘Rejection of Response to Preliminary Determination’’ dated December 26, 2019, which explains Commerce’s reasons for rejecting Protech’s redacted letters in response to the Preliminary Determination. 4 In response to Protech’s letters in response to the Preliminary Determination dated December 18, 2019, Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition (DSMC), the petitioner in this proceeding, submitted its rebuttal brief on December 23, 2019. On December 26, 2019, we rejected DSMC’s rebuttal brief because it contained untimely filed new VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:48 Feb 19, 2020 Jkt 250001 requested a hearing.5 Because a hearing is limited to arguments raised in case and rebuttal briefs under 19 CFR 351.310(c) and we do not have case briefs on the record, we did not hold a hearing.6 We conducted this anticircumvention inquiry in accordance with section 781(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.225(h). The current deadline for the final determination is February 24, 2020. Scope of the Order The products covered by the order are all finished circular sawblades, whether slotted or not, with a working part that is comprised of a diamond segment or segments, and parts thereof, regardless of specification or size, except as specifically excluded below. Within the scope of the order are semi-finished diamond sawblades, including diamond sawblade cores and diamond sawblade segments. Diamond sawblade cores are circular steel plates, whether or not attached to non-steel plates, with slots. Diamond sawblade cores are manufactured principally, but not exclusively, from alloy steel. A diamond sawblade segment consists of a mixture of diamonds (whether natural or synthetic, and regardless of the quantity of diamonds) and metal powders (including, but not limited to, iron, cobalt, nickel, tungsten carbide) that are formed together into a solid shape (from generally, but not limited to, a heating and pressing process). Sawblades with diamonds directly attached to the core with a resin or electroplated bond, which thereby do not contain a diamond segment, are not included within the scope of the order. Diamond sawblades and/or sawblade cores with a thickness of less than 0.025 inches, or with a thickness greater than 1.1 inches, are excluded from the scope of the order. Circular steel plates that have a cutting edge of non-diamond material, such as external teeth that protrude from the outer diameter of the plate, whether or not finished, are excluded from the scope of the order. factual information that we had rejected from Protech’s letters in response to the Preliminary Determination. See Commerce’s Letter, ‘‘Rejection of Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated December 26, 2019. In the December 26, 2019 letter, we stated that DSMC was allowed to resubmit its redacted rebuttal brief if Protech resubmitted its redacted response to Preliminary Determination in a timely manner. Protech did not resubmit its response to the Preliminary Determination. 5 See Protech’s Letter, ‘‘Request for Hearing, Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c),’’ dated November 29, 2019. 6 See Memorandum, ‘‘Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Hearing Request Declined,’’ dated February 3, 2020. PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Diamond sawblade cores with a Rockwell C hardness of less than 25 are excluded from the scope of the order. Diamond sawblades and/or diamond segment(s) with diamonds that predominantly have a mesh size number greater than 240 (such as 250 or 260) are excluded from the scope of the order. Merchandise subject to the order is typically imported under heading 8202.39.00.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). When packaged together as a set for retail sale with an item that is separately classified under headings 8202 to 8205 of the HTSUS, diamond sawblades or parts thereof may be imported under heading 8206.00.00.00 of the HTSUS. On October 11, 2011, Commerce included the 6804.21.00.00 HTSUS classification number to the customs case reference file, pursuant to a request by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.7 Pursuant to requests by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Commerce included to the customs case reference file the following HTSUS classification numbers: 8202.39.0040 and 8202.39.0070 on January 22, 2015, and 6804.21.0010 and 6804.21.0080 on January 26, 2015.8 The tariff classification is provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Scope of the Anti-Circumvention Inquiry The products covered by this anticircumvention inquiry are diamond sawblades produced in Canada by Protech with cores and segments produced in China and subsequently exported from Canada by Protech to the United States.9 Final Affirmative Determination Consistent with the Preliminary Determination, we determine, on the basis of facts available with an adverse inference, that diamond sawblades made with Chinese cores and Chinese segments joined in Canada by Protech and then subsequently exported from Canada to the United States are circumventing the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades from China, pursuant to section 781(b) of the Act. Because, as indicated above, we do 7 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 76128 (December 6, 2011). 8 See 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) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 3. 9 See Preliminary Determination, 84 FR at 58130. E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM 20FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 34 / Thursday, February 20, 2020 / Notices not have any additional information or comments on the record regarding our Preliminary Determination, our final determination remains unchanged from our Preliminary Determination. Therefore, we determine that it is appropriate to include this merchandise within the scope of the antidumping duty order and to instruct CBP to continue to suspend any entries of diamond sawblades produced in Canada by Protech with Chinese cores and Chinese segments and then subsequently exported from Canada to the United States. lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES Continued Suspension of Liquidation In accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(l)(3), based on this final determination in this anticircumvention inquiry, Commerce will direct CBP to suspend liquidation and to require a cash deposit of estimated duties on unliquidated entries of diamond sawblades produced (i.e., assembled or completed) using Chinese cores and Chinese segments by Protech in Canada that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after April 29, 2019, the date of initiation of this anticircumvention inquiry. The suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice. As we explained in the Preliminary Determination,10 Commerce will instruct CBP to require antidumping duty cash deposits equal to the rate established for the China-wide entity, i.e., 82.05 percent,11 for entries of such merchandise produced and exported by Protech. Diamond sawblades assembled or completed in Canada using non-Chinese origin cores and/or non-Chinese origin segments are not subject to this anticircumvention inquiry. However, because Protech failed to cooperate with Commerce’s request for information, Commerce preliminarily found that Protech is not currently able to identify diamond sawblades produced with nonChinese origin cores and/or nonChinese origin segments. Therefore, in the Preliminary Determination, Commerce decided not to implement a certification process at the preliminary stage and Commerce required cash deposits on all entries of diamond sawblades produced and exported by Protech in Canada.12 We invited parties to comment on this issue in their case 10 Id., 84 at 58131. e.g., Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016–2017, 83 FR 64331, 64332 (December 14, 2018). 12 See Preliminary Determination, 84 FR at 58131. 11 See, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:48 Feb 19, 2020 Jkt 250001 briefs. No interested parties submitted case briefs. Therefore, for the final determination, we continue to determine that we will not implement a certification process for diamond sawblades already suspended, and will require cash deposits on all entries of diamond sawblades produced and exported by Protech in Canada, consistent with the Preliminary Determination. However, Protech may request reconsideration of our denial of the certification process in a future segment of the proceeding, i.e., a changed circumstances review or administrative review.13 Administrative Protective Order This notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return/ destruction or APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. Notification to Interested Parties This determination is issued and published in accordance with section 781(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(f). Dated: February 12, 2020. Jeffrey I. Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2020–03362 Filed 2–19–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–114] Certain Glass Containers From the People’s Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Less-Than-FairValue Investigation Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Applicable February 20, 2020. AGENCY: 13 See, e.g., Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 84 FR 29164 (June 21, 2019), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 22; see also Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of Anti-Circumvention Inquiry, 84 FR 33920, 33921 (July 16, 2019); Preliminary Determination, 84 FR at 58131. PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 9739 Lilit Astvatsatrian or Aleksandras Nakutis, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6412 or (202) 482–3147, respectively. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On October 15, 2019, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated a less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation of imports of certain glass containers (glass containers) from the People’s Republic of China.1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than March 3, 2020. Postponement of Preliminary Determination Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Commerce to issue the preliminary determination in an LTFV investigation within 140 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation. However, section 733(c)(1) of the Act permits Commerce to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 190 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation if: (A) The petitioner makes a timely request for a postponement; or (B) Commerce concludes that the parties concerned are cooperating, that the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional time is necessary to make a preliminary determination. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a request to postpone 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reasons for postponement. Commerce will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request. On February 3, 2020, the petitioner 2 submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary determination in this LTFV investigation.3 The petitioner stated that it requests postponement ‘‘to allow all parties ample time to fully analyze the enormous volume of critical information 1 See Certain Glass Containers from the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-FairValue Investigation, 84 FR 56174 (October 21, 2019). 2 The petitioner is the American Glass Packaging Coalition. 3 See Petitioner’s Letter ‘‘Certain Glass Containers from the People’s Republic of China: Request to Postpone Preliminary Determination,’’ dated February 3, 2020. E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM 20FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 34 (Thursday, February 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9737-9739]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03362]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-900]


Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of 
China: Final Determination of Anti-Circumvention Inquiry

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Protech 
Diamond Tools Inc. (Protech) is circumventing the antidumping duty 
order on diamond sawblades and parts

[[Page 9738]]

thereof (diamond sawblades) from the People's Republic of China 
(China).

DATES: Applicable February 20, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun, 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On October 30, 2019, Commerce published the preliminary affirmative 
determination of circumvention of the antidumping duty order on diamond 
sawblades from China.\1\ We received no case or rebuttal briefs with 
respect to the Preliminary Determination. On November 29, 2019, in 
response to the Preliminary Determination, Protech filed a letter which 
contained untimely filed new factual information. On December 17, 2019, 
we rejected Protech's letter in response to the Preliminary 
Determination because it contained untimely filed new factual 
information, and we provided Protech an opportunity to re-submit its 
letter with the redaction of untimely filed new factual information.\2\ 
On December 18, 2019, Protech submitted two letters in response to the 
Preliminary Determination, which still contained untimely filed new 
factual information that we had identified in our earlier December 17, 
2019 rejection letter. On December 26, 2019, we rejected Protech's two 
letters because they contained untimely filed new factual information, 
and we provided Protech with another opportunity to re-submit its 
letter in response to the Preliminary Determination after the redaction 
of all untimely filed new factual information.\3\ Protech did not re-
submit its response to the Preliminary Determination by the established 
deadline.\4\ Protech also requested a hearing.\5\ Because a hearing is 
limited to arguments raised in case and rebuttal briefs under 19 CFR 
351.310(c) and we do not have case briefs on the record, we did not 
hold a hearing.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of 
Circumvention, 84 FR 58130 (October 30, 2019) (Preliminary 
Determination).
    \2\ See Commerce's Letter, ``Rejection of Response to 
Preliminary Determination'' dated December 17, 2019, which explains 
Commerce's reasons for rejecting Protech's letter in response to the 
Preliminary Determination.
    \3\ See Commerce's Letter, ``Rejection of Response to 
Preliminary Determination'' dated December 26, 2019, which explains 
Commerce's reasons for rejecting Protech's redacted letters in 
response to the Preliminary Determination.
    \4\ In response to Protech's letters in response to the 
Preliminary Determination dated December 18, 2019, Diamond Sawblades 
Manufacturers' Coalition (DSMC), the petitioner in this proceeding, 
submitted its rebuttal brief on December 23, 2019. On December 26, 
2019, we rejected DSMC's rebuttal brief because it contained 
untimely filed new factual information that we had rejected from 
Protech's letters in response to the Preliminary Determination. See 
Commerce's Letter, ``Rejection of Rebuttal Brief,'' dated December 
26, 2019. In the December 26, 2019 letter, we stated that DSMC was 
allowed to resubmit its redacted rebuttal brief if Protech 
resubmitted its redacted response to Preliminary Determination in a 
timely manner. Protech did not resubmit its response to the 
Preliminary Determination.
    \5\ See Protech's Letter, ``Request for Hearing, Pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.310(c),'' dated November 29, 2019.
    \6\ See Memorandum, ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from 
the People's Republic of China: Hearing Request Declined,'' dated 
February 3, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We conducted this anti-circumvention inquiry in accordance with 
section 781(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 
CFR 351.225(h). The current deadline for the final determination is 
February 24, 2020.

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are all finished circular 
sawblades, whether slotted or not, with a working part that is 
comprised of a diamond segment or segments, and parts thereof, 
regardless of specification or size, except as specifically excluded 
below. Within the scope of the order are semi-finished diamond 
sawblades, including diamond sawblade cores and diamond sawblade 
segments. Diamond sawblade cores are circular steel plates, whether or 
not attached to non-steel plates, with slots. Diamond sawblade cores 
are manufactured principally, but not exclusively, from alloy steel. A 
diamond sawblade segment consists of a mixture of diamonds (whether 
natural or synthetic, and regardless of the quantity of diamonds) and 
metal powders (including, but not limited to, iron, cobalt, nickel, 
tungsten carbide) that are formed together into a solid shape (from 
generally, but not limited to, a heating and pressing process).
    Sawblades with diamonds directly attached to the core with a resin 
or electroplated bond, which thereby do not contain a diamond segment, 
are not included within the scope of the order. Diamond sawblades and/
or sawblade cores with a thickness of less than 0.025 inches, or with a 
thickness greater than 1.1 inches, are excluded from the scope of the 
order. Circular steel plates that have a cutting edge of non-diamond 
material, such as external teeth that protrude from the outer diameter 
of the plate, whether or not finished, are excluded from the scope of 
the order. Diamond sawblade cores with a Rockwell C hardness of less 
than 25 are excluded from the scope of the order. Diamond sawblades 
and/or diamond segment(s) with diamonds that predominantly have a mesh 
size number greater than 240 (such as 250 or 260) are excluded from the 
scope of the order.
    Merchandise subject to the order is typically imported under 
heading 8202.39.00.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (HTSUS). When packaged together as a set for retail sale with an 
item that is separately classified under headings 8202 to 8205 of the 
HTSUS, diamond sawblades or parts thereof may be imported under heading 
8206.00.00.00 of the HTSUS. On October 11, 2011, Commerce included the 
6804.21.00.00 HTSUS classification number to the customs case reference 
file, pursuant to a request by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.\7\ 
Pursuant to requests by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), 
Commerce included to the customs case reference file the following 
HTSUS classification numbers: 8202.39.0040 and 8202.39.0070 on January 
22, 2015, and 6804.21.0010 and 6804.21.0080 on January 26, 2015.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the Republic of 
Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 76 FR 76128 (December 6, 2011).
    \8\ See 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) and accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The tariff classification is provided for convenience and customs 
purposes; however, the written description of the scope of the order is 
dispositive.

Scope of the Anti-Circumvention Inquiry

    The products covered by this anti-circumvention inquiry are diamond 
sawblades produced in Canada by Protech with cores and segments 
produced in China and subsequently exported from Canada by Protech to 
the United States.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Preliminary Determination, 84 FR at 58130.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Affirmative Determination

    Consistent with the Preliminary Determination, we determine, on the 
basis of facts available with an adverse inference, that diamond 
sawblades made with Chinese cores and Chinese segments joined in Canada 
by Protech and then subsequently exported from Canada to the United 
States are circumventing the antidumping duty order on diamond 
sawblades from China, pursuant to section 781(b) of the Act. Because, 
as indicated above, we do

[[Page 9739]]

not have any additional information or comments on the record regarding 
our Preliminary Determination, our final determination remains 
unchanged from our Preliminary Determination. Therefore, we determine 
that it is appropriate to include this merchandise within the scope of 
the antidumping duty order and to instruct CBP to continue to suspend 
any entries of diamond sawblades produced in Canada by Protech with 
Chinese cores and Chinese segments and then subsequently exported from 
Canada to the United States.

Continued Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(l)(3), based on this final 
determination in this anti-circumvention inquiry, Commerce will direct 
CBP to suspend liquidation and to require a cash deposit of estimated 
duties on unliquidated entries of diamond sawblades produced (i.e., 
assembled or completed) using Chinese cores and Chinese segments by 
Protech in Canada that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after April 29, 2019, the date of initiation of this 
anti-circumvention inquiry. The suspension of liquidation instructions 
will remain in effect until further notice. As we explained in the 
Preliminary Determination,\10\ Commerce will instruct CBP to require 
antidumping duty cash deposits equal to the rate established for the 
China-wide entity, i.e., 82.05 percent,\11\ for entries of such 
merchandise produced and exported by Protech.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id., 84 at 58131.
    \11\ See, e.g., Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the 
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 64331, 64332 (December 14, 
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Diamond sawblades assembled or completed in Canada using non-
Chinese origin cores and/or non-Chinese origin segments are not subject 
to this anti-circumvention inquiry. However, because Protech failed to 
cooperate with Commerce's request for information, Commerce 
preliminarily found that Protech is not currently able to identify 
diamond sawblades produced with non-Chinese origin cores and/or non-
Chinese origin segments. Therefore, in the Preliminary Determination, 
Commerce decided not to implement a certification process at the 
preliminary stage and Commerce required cash deposits on all entries of 
diamond sawblades produced and exported by Protech in Canada.\12\ We 
invited parties to comment on this issue in their case briefs. No 
interested parties submitted case briefs. Therefore, for the final 
determination, we continue to determine that we will not implement a 
certification process for diamond sawblades already suspended, and will 
require cash deposits on all entries of diamond sawblades produced and 
exported by Protech in Canada, consistent with the Preliminary 
Determination. However, Protech may request reconsideration of our 
denial of the certification process in a future segment of the 
proceeding, i.e., a changed circumstances review or administrative 
review.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Preliminary Determination, 84 FR at 58131.
    \13\ See, e.g., Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from the 
People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of 
Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 84 FR 29164 (June 21, 
2019), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 22; see 
also Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic 
of China: Final Determination of Anti-Circumvention Inquiry, 84 FR 
33920, 33921 (July 16, 2019); Preliminary Determination, 84 FR at 
58131.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return/destruction or APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with 
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
section 781(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(f).

    Dated: February 12, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-03362 Filed 2-19-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P