Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Turkey: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Amended Final Determination in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation; Notice of Amended Final Determination, Amended Antidumping Duty Order; Notice of Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order in Part; and Discontinuation of the 2017-18 and 2018-19 Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, in Part, 29399-29401 [2020-10491]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 95 / Friday, May 15, 2020 / Notices
circumstances, the export of technology
requires additional safeguards to insure
that advanced U.S. knowhow is not
permitted to end up in the wrong hands.
The letter of assurance puts the
consignee on notice that the technology
is subject to U.S. export controls and
causes the consignee to certify that it
will not release the data or the direct
product of the data to certain specified
countries; thus providing assurance that
U.S. national security data will be
safeguarded.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations.
Frequency: On occasion.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
Legal Authority: Export Control
Reform Act 4812(b) and 4814(b)(1)(B).
This information collection request
may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov.
Follow the instructions to view the
Department of Commerce collections
currently under review by OMB.
Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be
submitted within 30 days of the
publication of this notice on the
following website www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain. Find this
information collection by selecting
‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open
for Public Comments’’ or by using the
search function and entering either the
title of the collection or the OMB
Control Number 0694–0047.
Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of
the Chief Information Officer, Commerce
Department.
[FR Doc. 2020–10466 Filed 5–14–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
[A–489–826]
Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products
From Turkey: Notice of Court Decision
Not in Harmony With the Amended
Final Determination in the Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation; Notice of
Amended Final Determination,
Amended Antidumping Duty Order;
Notice of Revocation of Antidumping
Duty Order in Part; and
Discontinuation of the 2017–18 and
2018–19 Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews, in Part
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 13, 2020, the U.S.
Court of International Trade (CIT)
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 May 14, 2020
Jkt 250001
sustained the Department of
Commerce’s (Commerce) third remand
redetermination pertaining to the lessthan-fair-value (LTFV) investigation of
certain hot-rolled steel flat products
(hot-rolled steel) from the Republic of
Turkey (Turkey). Commerce is notifying
the public that the CIT’s final judgment
is not in harmony with Commerce’s
Amended Final Determination in the
LTFV investigation of hot-rolled steel
from Turkey. Pursuant to the CIT’s final
judgment, Commerce is amending the
estimated weighted-average dumping
margins for Ereg˘li Demir ve C
¸ elik
Fabrikalari T.A.S
¸ . and Iskenderun
Demir Ve Celik (collectively, Erdemir)
and C
¸ olakog˘lu Metalurji A.S. and
C
¸ olakog˘lu Dis Ticaret A.S. (collectively,
C
¸ olakog˘lu), and excluding C
¸ olakog˘lu
from the Order. Further, Commerce is
discontinuing, in part, the 2017–18 and
2018–19 administrative reviews with
respect to C
¸ olakog˘lu.
DATES: Applicable April 23, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni
Page, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 12, 2016, Commerce
published its Final Determination in the
LTFV investigation of hot-rolled steel
from Turkey.1 Subsequently, on October
3, 2016, Commerce published its
Amended Final Determination and
Order.2 As reflected in Commerce’s
Amended Final Determination,
Commerce calculated estimated
weighted-average dumping margins of
6.77 percent for C
¸ olakog˘lu, 4.15 percent
for Erdemir, and 6.41 percent for all
other producers and exporters of subject
merchandise.3
C
¸ olakog˘lu and Erdemir appealed
Commerce’s Final Determination, as
amended by the Amended Final
Determination, to the CIT. On March 22,
2018, the CIT remanded the Amended
Final Determination for Commerce to
explain or reconsider: (1) Its treatment
1 See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from
the Republic of Turkey: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 81 FR 53428 (August
12, 2016) (Final Determination), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
2 See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from
Australia, Brazil, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the
Netherlands, the Republic of Turkey, and the
United Kingdom: Amended Final Affirmative
Antidumping Determinations for Australia, the
Republic of Korea, and the Republic of Turkey and
Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 67962 (October 3,
2016) (Amended Final Determination and Order).
3 Id., 81 FR at 67965.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29399
of Erdemir’s home market date of sale;
(2) C
¸ olakog˘lu’s request for a duty
drawback adjustment; and (3)
Commerce’s rejection of C
¸ olakog˘lu’s
corrections to international ocean
freight expenses presented at
verification.4 On July 20, 2018,
Commerce issued its first results of
redetermination, in which it determined
to: (1) Use the ‘‘click date’’ of the proforma invoice as the date of sale for
Erdemir’s home market sales; (2) grant
C
¸ olakog˘lu’s request for a duty drawback
adjustment; and (3) continue to reject
C
¸ olakog˘lu’s corrections to its reported
international ocean freight expenses,
which were presented at verification.5
As a result of the changes in the First
Redetermination, Commerce calculated
estimated weighted-average dumping
margins of 5.70 percent for C
¸ olakog˘lu,
2.73 percent for Erdemir, and 5.29
percent for all other producers and
exporters of subject merchandise.6
On December 27, 2018, in its Second
Remand Order, the CIT sustained
Commerce’s revised home market date
of sale for Erdemir and its determination
not to accept corrections to C
¸ olakog˘lu’s
international ocean freight expenses that
had been presented at verification, and
remanded Commerce’s methodology for
calculating C
¸ olakog˘lu’s duty drawback
adjustment.7 Specifically, the CIT found
that Commerce’s calculation
methodology of allocating exempted
duties over the total cost of sales for hotrolled steel to calculate C
¸ olakog˘lu’s duty
drawback adjustment was inconsistent
with the statute.8
On June 3, 2019, Commerce issued its
second results of redetermination, in
which we increased C
¸ olakog˘lu’s U.S.
price by the full amount of duties that
were drawn back or forgiven and then
added the same per-unit duty amount to
normal value as a circumstance of sale
adjustment.9 As a result of the changes
to our duty drawback methodology in
the Second Redetermination, Commerce
calculated estimated weighted-average
dumping margins of 6.27 percent for
C
¸ olakog˘lu, and 5.79 percent for all other
4 See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v.
United States, 308 F. Supp. 3d 1297 (CIT 2018).
5 See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S., et
al. v. United States, Consol. Ct. No. 16–00218, Slip
Op. 18–27 Final Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Remand, dated July 20, 2018 (First
Redetermination).
6 See First Redetermination at 16.
7 See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v.
United States, 357 F. Supp. 3d 1325 (CIT 2018)
(Second Remand Order).
8 See Second Remand Order at 16; see also Eregli
Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v. United States,
Consol. Ct. No. 16–00218, Slip Op. 18–180 Final
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Second
Court Remand, dated June 3, 2019 (Second
Redetermination) at 5, 13–16.
9 Id. at 16.
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
29400
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 95 / Friday, May 15, 2020 / Notices
producers and exporters of subject
merchandise.10
On October 29, 2019, in its Third
Remand Order, the CIT ordered
Commerce to recalculate normal value
without making a circumstance of sale
adjustment related to the duty drawback
adjustment made to U.S. price.11 On
January 27, 2020, in the third results of
redetermination, Commerce did not
make a circumstance of sale adjustment
to normal value to reflect the difference
between the amount of import duties
reflected in C
¸ olakog˘lu’s reported costs
of production and the amount of import
duties that the Court directed Commerce
to recognize as the basis for a duty
drawback adjustment to U.S. price.12 In
addition, Commerce corrected the unit
of currency that C
¸ olakog˘lu used to
report its U.S. duty drawback amount.13
As a result of the changes to our duty
drawback methodology in the Third
Redetermination, Commerce calculated
estimated weighted-average dumping
margins of 0.00 percent for C
¸ olakog˘lu,
and 2.73 percent for all other producers
and exporters of subject merchandise.14
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,15 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,16 the
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
held that, pursuant to section 516A of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), Commerce must publish a notice
of 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
April 13, 2020 judgment constitutes a
final decision of the Court that is not in
harmony with Commerce’s Amended
Final Determination.17 Thus, this notice
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
10 Id.
11 See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v.
United States, 415 F. Supp. 3d 1216 (CIT 2019)
(Third Remand Order).
12 See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v.
United States Consol. Ct. No. 16–00218, Slip Op.
19–135 (CIT October 29, 2019); see also Final
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Third Court
Remand, dated January 27, 2020 (Third
Redetermination) at 6.
13 See Third Redetermination at 6.
14 Id. at 5.
15 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
16 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir.
2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
17 See Ereg
˘ li Demir ve C
¸ elik Fabrikalari T.A.S
¸ . v.
United States, Ct. No. 16–00218, Slip Op. 20–47
(CIT April 13, 2020).
18 See Second Redetermination at 16.
19 As explained in the Third Redetermination,
because C
¸ olakog˘lu’s estimated weighted-average
dumping margin is now 0.00 percent, its rate is no
longer factored in the calculation of the all-others
rate. Accordingly, the rate calculated for Erdemir is
now the only rate that is not zero, de minimis or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 May 14, 2020
Jkt 250001
is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken and
section 516A of the Act.
Amended Final Determination
Because there is now a final court
decision, Commerce is amending its
Amended Final Determination. The
revised estimated weighted-average
dumping margins for the period of
investigation July 1, 2014 through June
30, 2015 are as follows:
Exporter or producer
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
ten days after the CIT’s final decision)
at a cash deposit rate of 0.00 percent.23
Discontinued Administrative Reviews
As a result of C
¸ olakog˘lu’s exclusion
from the Order, Commerce is
discontinuing the ongoing 2017–18 and
2018–19 administrative reviews, in part,
with respect to C
¸ olakog˘lu.24 Further,
Commerce will not initiate a subsequent
administrative review of entries of
subject merchandise both produced and
exported by C
¸ olakog˘lu pursuant to the
Order.25
Cash Deposit Requirements for Erdemir
and All Other Producers and Exporters
Because Erdemir does not have a
superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., there
0.00 have been no final results published in
a subsequent administrative review for
Erdemir, Commerce will instruct CBP to
2.73 18 collect a cash deposit for estimated
2.73 19 antidumping duties at ad valorem rates
equal to the estimated weighted-average
Amended Antidumping Duty Order
dumping margins listed above for
Erdemir and all other producers and
Pursuant to section 735(a)(4) of the
exporters of the subject merchandise,
Act, Commerce ‘‘shall disregard any
effective April 23, 2020. Entries of
weighted average dumping margin that
subject merchandise for all-other
is de minimis as defined in section
producers and exporters include entries
733(b)(3) of the Act.’’ 20 As a result of
of subject merchandise not both
this amended final determination, in
produced and exported by C
¸ olakog˘lu
which Commerce has calculated an
(i.e., produced by C
¸ olakog˘lu and
estimated weighted-average dumping
exported by another party, or exported
margin of 0.00 percent for C
¸ olakog˘lu,
by C
¸ olakog˘lu and produced by another
Commerce is hereby excluding
party).
merchandise produced and exported by
Liquidation of Suspended Entries for
C
¸ olakog˘lu from the Order.21 This
C¸olakog˘lu
exclusion does not apply to
merchandise that is not both produced
If the CIT’s final judgment is not
and exported by C
¸ olakog˘lu.22
appealed, or if appealed and upheld,
C
¸ olakog˘lu Metalurji A.S. and
C
¸ olakog˘lu Dis Ticaret A.S. ......
Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari
T.A.S. and Iskenderun Demir
Ve Celik ...................................
All Others ....................................
Continued Suspension of Entries for
C¸olakog˘lu
Commerce will instruct CBP to
terminate the suspension of liquidation
Pursuant to Timken, the suspension
of liquidation for entries of subject
merchandise produced and exported by
C
¸ olakog˘lu will continue during the
pendency of the appeals process. Thus,
we will continue to instruct CBP to
suspend liquidation of all unliquidated
entries from C
¸ olakog˘lu that are entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption after April 23, 2020 (i.e.,
23 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) (Drill Pipe); see also 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).
24 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 83 FR
63615 (December 11, 2018); see also Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 84 FR 67712 (December 11,
2019).
25 See Drill Pipe, 79 FR at 78038; see also Certain
Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates: Notice
of Court Decision Not in Harmony with the Final
Determination and Amended Final Determination
of the Less Than Fair Value Investigation, 80 FR
77316 (December 14, 2015).
based entirely on facts available, and as such
Erdemir’s rate is now the estimated weightedaverage dumping margin for all other producers and
exporters of subject merchandise. See
Memorandum, ‘‘Redetermination Pursuant to
Remand of Hot-Rolled Steel Products from the
Republic of Turkey: Final Remand Calculation
Memorandum for the ‘All-Others’ Rate,’’ dated
January 27, 2020.
20 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.’’
21 See Third Redetermination at 7.
22 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 95 / Friday, May 15, 2020 / Notices
and to liquidate entries produced and
exported by C
¸ olakog˘lu without regard to
antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(c)(1) and
(e), 735(d), 736(a), 751(a) and 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: May 11, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the Orders
are stainless sheet and strip, whether in
coils or straight lengths. For a full
description of the scope of the Orders,
see the ‘‘Scope of the Orders,’’ in the
Appendix to this notice.
[FR Doc. 2020–10491 Filed 5–14–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–042, C–570–043]
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip From
the People’s Republic of China:
Initiation of Anti-Circumvention and
Scope Inquiries on the Antidumping
Duty and Countervailing Duty Orders
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: Based on available
information, the Department of
Commerce (Commerce) is self-initiating
a country-wide anti-circumvention
inquiry to determine whether imports of
stainless steel sheet and strip (stainless
sheet and strip), completed in Vietnam
using certain stainless steel flat-rolled
inputs manufactured in the People’s
Republic of China (China), are
circumventing the antidumping duty
(AD) and countervailing duty (CVD)
orders on stainless sheet and strip from
China (collectively, the Orders).
Commerce is also self-initiating a scope
inquiry to determine whether stainless
sheet and strip that is produced in
China and undergoes further processing
in Vietnam before being exported to the
United States is subject to the Orders.
DATES: Applicable May 15, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Blaine Wiltse at (202) 482–6345, AD/
CVD Operations, or Barb Rawdon at
(202) 482–0474, Office of Policy,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Background
On February 12, 2016, AK Steel
Corporation, Allegheny Ludlum, LLC D/
B/A ATI Flat Rolled Products, North
American Stainless, and Outokumpu
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 May 14, 2020
Jkt 250001
Stainless USA, LLC filed petitions
seeking the imposition of antidumping
and countervailing duties on imports of
stainless sheet and strip from China.1
Following Commerce’s affirmative
determinations of dumping and
countervailable subsidies,2 and the U.S.
International Trade Commission’s
(USITC) finding of material injury,3
Commerce issued AD and CVD orders
on imports of stainless sheet and strip
from China.4
Merchandise Subject to the AntiCircumvention Inquiry
The anti-circumvention inquiry
covers stainless sheet and strip
completed in Vietnam using certain
non-subject stainless steel flat-rolled
inputs of Chinese-origin that is
subsequently exported from Vietnam to
the United States.
Initiation of Anti-Circumvention
Inquiry
Section 781(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act), provides
that Commerce may find circumvention
of an AD or CVD order when
merchandise of the same class or kind
subject to the order is completed or
assembled in a foreign country other
than the country to which the order
applies. In conducting anticircumvention inquiries, under section
781(b)(1) of the Act, Commerce relies on
1 See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation, 81 FR 12711 (March 10,
2016); see also Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from
the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of
Countervailing Duty Investigation, 81 FR 13322
(March 14, 2016).
2 See Antidumping Duty Investigation of Stainless
Steel Sheet and Strip from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Final Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 9716 (February 8,
2017); see also Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the People’s
Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination,
and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances
Determination, in Part, 82 FR 9714 (February 8,
2017).
3 See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from China;
Determinations, 82 FR 15716 (March 30, 2017); see
also Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from China,
Inv. Nos. 791–TA–557 and 731–TA–1312, USITC
Pub. 4676 (March 2017) (Final).
4 See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the
People’s Republic of China: Antidumping Duty
Order, 82 FR 16160 (April 3, 2017) (AD Order); see
also Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the
People’s Republic of China: Countervailing Duty
Order, 82 FR 16166 (April 3, 2017) (CVD Order)
(collectively, Orders).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29401
the following criteria: (A) Merchandise
imported into the United States is of the
same class or kind as any merchandise
produced in a foreign country that is the
subject of an antidumping or
countervailing duty order or finding, (B)
before importation into the United
States, such imported merchandise is
completed or assembled in another
foreign country from merchandise
which is subject to the order or
merchandise which is produced in the
foreign country that is subject to the
order, (C) the process of assembly or
completion in the foreign country
referred to in section (B) is minor or
insignificant, (D) the value of the
merchandise produced in the foreign
country to which the AD or CVD order
applies is a significant portion of the
total value of the merchandise exported
to the United States, and (E) the
administering authority determines that
action is appropriate to prevent evasion
of such order or finding.
In determining whether or not the
process of assembly or completion in a
third country is minor or insignificant
under section 781(b)(1)(C) of the Act,
section 781(b)(2) of the Act directs
Commerce to consider: (A) The level of
investment in the foreign country, (B)
the level of research and development
in the foreign country, (C) the nature of
the production process in the foreign
country, (D) the extent of production
facilities in the foreign country, and (E)
whether or not the value of processing
performed in the foreign country
represents a small proportion of the
value of the merchandise imported into
the United States. However, no single
factor, by itself, controls Commerce’s
determination of whether the process of
assembly or completion in a third
country is minor or insignificant.5
Accordingly, it is Commerce’s practice
to evaluate each of these five factors as
they exist in the third country,
depending on the totality of the
circumstances of the particular anticircumvention inquiry.6
Furthermore, section 781(b)(3) of the
Act sets forth additional factors to
consider in determining whether to
include merchandise assembled or
completed in a third country within the
scope of an antidumping and/or
countervailing duty order. Specifically,
Commerce shall take into account such
5 See Statement of Administrative Action
accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(SAA), H.R. Doc. No. 103–316 (1994) at 893.
6 See Uncovered Innerspring Units from the
People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative
Determination of Circumvention of the
Antidumping Duty Order, 83 FR 65626 (December
21, 2018), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at 4.
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 95 (Friday, May 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29399-29401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10491]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-489-826]
Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Turkey: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Amended Final Determination in
the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation; Notice of Amended Final
Determination, Amended Antidumping Duty Order; Notice of Revocation of
Antidumping Duty Order in Part; and Discontinuation of the 2017-18 and
2018-19 Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, in Part
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On April 13, 2020, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the Department of Commerce's (Commerce) third remand
redetermination pertaining to the less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation of certain hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled
steel) from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey). Commerce is notifying the
public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's
Amended Final Determination in the LTFV investigation of hot-rolled
steel from Turkey. Pursuant to the CIT's final judgment, Commerce is
amending the estimated weighted-average dumping margins for
Ere[gbreve]li Demir ve [Ccedil]elik Fabrikalari T.A.[Scedil]. and
Iskenderun Demir Ve Celik (collectively, Erdemir) and
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu Metalurji A.S. and [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu Dis
Ticaret A.S. (collectively, [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu), and excluding
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu from the Order. Further, Commerce is
discontinuing, in part, the 2017-18 and 2018-19 administrative reviews
with respect to [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu.
DATES: Applicable April 23, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni Page, AD/CVD Operations, Office
VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 12, 2016, Commerce published its Final Determination in
the LTFV investigation of hot-rolled steel from Turkey.\1\
Subsequently, on October 3, 2016, Commerce published its Amended Final
Determination and Order.\2\ As reflected in Commerce's Amended Final
Determination, Commerce calculated estimated weighted-average dumping
margins of 6.77 percent for [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu, 4.15 percent for
Erdemir, and 6.41 percent for all other producers and exporters of
subject merchandise.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic
of Turkey: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 81
FR 53428 (August 12, 2016) (Final Determination), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
\2\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Australia,
Brazil, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Netherlands, the Republic
of Turkey, and the United Kingdom: Amended Final Affirmative
Antidumping Determinations for Australia, the Republic of Korea, and
the Republic of Turkey and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 67962
(October 3, 2016) (Amended Final Determination and Order).
\3\ Id., 81 FR at 67965.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu and Erdemir appealed Commerce's Final
Determination, as amended by the Amended Final Determination, to the
CIT. On March 22, 2018, the CIT remanded the Amended Final
Determination for Commerce to explain or reconsider: (1) Its treatment
of Erdemir's home market date of sale; (2) [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's
request for a duty drawback adjustment; and (3) Commerce's rejection of
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's corrections to international ocean freight
expenses presented at verification.\4\ On July 20, 2018, Commerce
issued its first results of redetermination, in which it determined to:
(1) Use the ``click date'' of the pro-forma invoice as the date of sale
for Erdemir's home market sales; (2) grant [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's
request for a duty drawback adjustment; and (3) continue to reject
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's corrections to its reported international
ocean freight expenses, which were presented at verification.\5\ As a
result of the changes in the First Redetermination, Commerce calculated
estimated weighted-average dumping margins of 5.70 percent for
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu, 2.73 percent for Erdemir, and 5.29 percent for
all other producers and exporters of subject merchandise.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v. United
States, 308 F. Supp. 3d 1297 (CIT 2018).
\5\ See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S., et al. v.
United States, Consol. Ct. No. 16-00218, Slip Op. 18-27 Final
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, dated July 20, 2018
(First Redetermination).
\6\ See First Redetermination at 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 27, 2018, in its Second Remand Order, the CIT sustained
Commerce's revised home market date of sale for Erdemir and its
determination not to accept corrections to [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's
international ocean freight expenses that had been presented at
verification, and remanded Commerce's methodology for calculating
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's duty drawback adjustment.\7\ Specifically,
the CIT found that Commerce's calculation methodology of allocating
exempted duties over the total cost of sales for hot-rolled steel to
calculate [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's duty drawback adjustment was
inconsistent with the statute.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v. United
States, 357 F. Supp. 3d 1325 (CIT 2018) (Second Remand Order).
\8\ See Second Remand Order at 16; see also Eregli Demir ve
Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v. United States, Consol. Ct. No. 16-00218,
Slip Op. 18-180 Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Second
Court Remand, dated June 3, 2019 (Second Redetermination) at 5, 13-
16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 3, 2019, Commerce issued its second results of
redetermination, in which we increased [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's U.S.
price by the full amount of duties that were drawn back or forgiven and
then added the same per-unit duty amount to normal value as a
circumstance of sale adjustment.\9\ As a result of the changes to our
duty drawback methodology in the Second Redetermination, Commerce
calculated estimated weighted-average dumping margins of 6.27 percent
for [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu, and 5.79 percent for all other
[[Page 29400]]
producers and exporters of subject merchandise.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id. at 16.
\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 29, 2019, in its Third Remand Order, the CIT ordered
Commerce to recalculate normal value without making a circumstance of
sale adjustment related to the duty drawback adjustment made to U.S.
price.\11\ On January 27, 2020, in the third results of
redetermination, Commerce did not make a circumstance of sale
adjustment to normal value to reflect the difference between the amount
of import duties reflected in [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's reported costs
of production and the amount of import duties that the Court directed
Commerce to recognize as the basis for a duty drawback adjustment to
U.S. price.\12\ In addition, Commerce corrected the unit of currency
that [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu used to report its U.S. duty drawback
amount.\13\ As a result of the changes to our duty drawback methodology
in the Third Redetermination, Commerce calculated estimated weighted-
average dumping margins of 0.00 percent for [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu,
and 2.73 percent for all other producers and exporters of subject
merchandise.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v. United
States, 415 F. Supp. 3d 1216 (CIT 2019) (Third Remand Order).
\12\ See Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v. United
States Consol. Ct. No. 16-00218, Slip Op. 19-135 (CIT October 29,
2019); see also Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Third
Court Remand, dated January 27, 2020 (Third Redetermination) at 6.
\13\ See Third Redetermination at 6.
\14\ Id. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\15\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\16\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that,
pursuant to section 516A of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), Commerce must publish a notice of 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 April 13,
2020 judgment constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in
harmony with Commerce's Amended Final Determination.\17\ Thus, this
notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of
Timken and section 516A of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\16\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
\17\ See Ere[gbreve]li Demir ve [Ccedil]elik Fabrikalari
T.A.[Scedil]. v. United States, Ct. No. 16-00218, Slip Op. 20-47
(CIT April 13, 2020).
\18\ See Second Redetermination at 16.
\19\ As explained in the Third Redetermination, because
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's estimated weighted-average dumping margin
is now 0.00 percent, its rate is no longer factored in the
calculation of the all-others rate. Accordingly, the rate calculated
for Erdemir is now the only rate that is not zero, de minimis or
based entirely on facts available, and as such Erdemir's rate is now
the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for all other
producers and exporters of subject merchandise. See Memorandum,
``Redetermination Pursuant to Remand of Hot-Rolled Steel Products
from the Republic of Turkey: Final Remand Calculation Memorandum for
the `All-Others' Rate,'' dated January 27, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Determination
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending
its Amended Final Determination. The revised estimated weighted-average
dumping margins for the period of investigation July 1, 2014 through
June 30, 2015 are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter or producer dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu Metalurji A.S. and 0.00
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu Dis Ticaret A.S....................
Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. and Iskenderun 2.73 \18\
Demir Ve Celik.............................................
All Others.................................................. 2.73 \19\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Antidumping Duty Order
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.'' \20\ As a result of this
amended final determination, in which Commerce has calculated an
estimated weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00 percent for
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu, Commerce is hereby excluding merchandise
produced and exported by [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu from the Order.\21\
This exclusion does not apply to merchandise that is not both produced
and exported by [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 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.''
\21\ See Third Redetermination at 7.
\22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continued Suspension of Entries for [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu
Pursuant to Timken, the suspension of liquidation for entries of
subject merchandise produced and exported by [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu
will continue during the pendency of the appeals process. Thus, we will
continue to instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of all unliquidated
entries from [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu that are entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption after April 23, 2020 (i.e., ten days
after the CIT's final decision) at a cash deposit rate of 0.00
percent.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 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) (Drill Pipe); see also 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discontinued Administrative Reviews
As a result of [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu's exclusion from the Order,
Commerce is discontinuing the ongoing 2017-18 and 2018-19
administrative reviews, in part, with respect to
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu.\24\ Further, Commerce will not initiate a
subsequent administrative review of entries of subject merchandise both
produced and exported by [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu pursuant to the
Order.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 63615 (December 11, 2018); see also
Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews, 84 FR 67712 (December 11, 2019).
\25\ See Drill Pipe, 79 FR at 78038; see also Certain Steel
Nails from the United Arab Emirates: Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony with the Final Determination and Amended Final Determination
of the Less Than Fair Value Investigation, 80 FR 77316 (December 14,
2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements for Erdemir and All Other Producers and
Exporters
Because Erdemir does not have a superseding cash deposit rate,
i.e., there have been no final results published in a subsequent
administrative review for Erdemir, Commerce will instruct CBP to
collect a cash deposit for estimated antidumping duties at ad valorem
rates equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins listed
above for Erdemir and all other producers and exporters of the subject
merchandise, effective April 23, 2020. Entries of subject merchandise
for all-other producers and exporters include entries of subject
merchandise not both produced and exported by [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu
(i.e., produced by [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu and exported by another
party, or exported by [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu and produced by another
party).
Liquidation of Suspended Entries for [Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu
If the CIT's final judgment is not appealed, or if appealed and
upheld, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of
liquidation
[[Page 29401]]
and to liquidate entries produced and exported by
[Ccedil]olako[gbreve]lu without regard to antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c)(1) and (e), 735(d), 736(a), 751(a) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: May 11, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-10491 Filed 5-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
