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
<![CDATA[
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withdrawn from warehouse, for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
