Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results of Review Pursuant to Court Decision; 2012-2013, 38362-38363 [2020-13814]
Download as PDF
38362
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 124 / Friday, June 26, 2020 / Notices
Company
Taihan Electric Wire Co., Ltd
Union Steel Co., Ltd .............
Subsidy rate
(percent
ad valorem)
0.59
0.59
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Assessment and Cash Deposit
Requirements
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(2), Commerce intends to
issue appropriate instructions to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15
days after publication of these final
results to liquidate shipments of subject
merchandise. Because we have
calculated a de minimis countervailable
subsidy rate for Hyundai Steel, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate
entries without regard to countervailing
duties in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212. We will instruct CBP to
liquidate shipments of subject
merchandise produced and/or exported
by POSCO and the above listed
companies, entered or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption from
January 1, 2017 through December 31,
2017, at the ad valorem rates listed
above for each respective company.
In accordance with section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, we intend also
to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits
of estimated countervailing duties, in
the amounts shown above, with the
exception of Hyundai Steel, on
shipments of subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of
publication of the final results of this
review. Because the countervailable
subsidy rate for Hyundai Steel is de
minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to
collect cash deposits at a rate of zero for
Hyundai Steel for all shipments of the
subject merchandise that are entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the date of
publication of the final results of this
administrative review. For all nonreviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to
continue to collect cash deposits of
estimated countervailing duties at the
most-recent company-specific or allothers rate applicable to the company,
as appropriate. These cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
of proceeding. Timely written
notification of the return/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.
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
These final results are issued and
published in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.221(b)(5).
Dated: June 22, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. List of Issues
III. Background
IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results
V. Scope of the Order
VI. Period of Review
VII. Rate for Non-Examined Companies
VIII. Subsidies Valuation Information
IX. Use of Facts Otherwise Available
X. Analysis of Programs
XI. Discussion of Comments
Comment 1: Whether the Electricity for
Less Than Adequate Remuneration
Upstream Subsidy Allegation Confers a
Benefit
Comment 2: Whether POSCO Plantec Co.,
Ltd. (POSCO Plantec) is POSCO’s CrossOwned Input Supplier
Comment 3: Whether POSCO Plantec
Received Countervailable Benefits
Through Its Debt Restructuring Program
Comment 4: Whether the Application of
Adverse Facts Available is Warranted for
Sungjin Geotec Co., Ltd.’s Non-Recurring
Subsidies Received During the Average
Useful Life Period
XII. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2020–13813 Filed 6–25–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Administrative Protective Order
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to parties subject to an
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:42 Jun 25, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–918]
Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; Notice of
Amended Final Results of Review
Pursuant to Court Decision; 2012–2013
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 11, 2020, the United
States Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the final results of
redetermination pertaining to the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on steel wire
garment hangers from the People’s
Republic of China (China) covering the
period of review (POR) October 1, 2012
through September 31, 2013. The
Department of Commerce (Commerce) is
notifying the public that the CIT’s final
judgment in this case is not in harmony
with the final results of the
administrative review, and that
Commerce is amending the final results
with respect to Shanghai Wells Hanger
Co., Ltd. (Shanghai Wells).
DATES: Applicable June 21, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD Operations,
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On March 13, 2015, Commerce
published its Final Results in the 2012–
2013 administrative review of steel wire
garment hangers from China.1 During
the review, Commerce selected
Thailand as the primary surrogate
country, finding that data from Thailand
provided the best available information
on the record to value Shanghai Wells’
reported factors of production (FOPs). In
particular, Commerce found that the
import data (including the surrogate
value (SV) for wire rod, the primary
material input FOP) and the labor SV for
Thailand were superior to the SV data
available from the Philippines, and the
1 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 2012–
2013, 80 FR 13332 (March 13, 2015) (Final Results),
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (IDM).
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\26JNN1.SGM
26JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 124 / Friday, June 26, 2020 / Notices
Thai financial statements were usable.2
Therefore, Commerce selected Thailand
as the primary surrogate country,
consistent with section 773(c) of the Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act) and used
the Thai SV data as the basis for its
dumping analysis.3
Shanghai Wells challenged the Final
Results, and, on March 2, 2017, the CIT
remanded that determination to
Commerce, questioning Commerce’s
decision to rely on ‘‘usable’’ Thai
financial statements based on a
preference to ‘‘stay within the primary
surrogate country,’’ because Commerce
must first ‘‘evaluate the available data
{sources}, which includes an
acknowledgement that on this record a
reasonable mind would not select the
Thai financial statements as better than
the Philippine {financial} statements.’’ 4
On June 7, 2017, Commerce issued
the First Redetermination Results,5
continuing to select Thailand as the
primary surrogate country and to value
all FOPs with data from the primary
surrogate country, in accordance with
the established regulatory preference.6
On February 7, 2020, the CIT granted
Commerce’s request for a voluntary
remand in order to further examine
concerns raised by the CIT and the
parties to this litigation.7 In the Second
Redetermination Results, Commerce
determined that the Philippine financial
statements on the record were the best
available information for valuing the
financial FOPs and recalculated the
weighted-average dumping margin for
Shanghai Wells.8 On June 11, 2020, the
CIT sustained Commerce’s Second
Redetermination Results.9
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,10 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,11 the
2 See Final Results, and accompanying IDM at
Comments 2 and 3.
3 Id.
4 See Shanghai Wells Hanger Co. v. United States,
211 F. Supp. 3d 1377, 1381 (CIT 2017).
5 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand in Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Consol. Court No. 15–00103, CIT
Slip Op. 17–24, dated June 7, 2017 (First
Redetermination Results).
6 See 19 CFR 351.408(c)(2); see also First
Redetermination Results at 2, 4–12.
7 See Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 15–00103, Order (CIT, February
7, 2020).
8 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand in Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Consol. Court No. 15–00103 (Second
Redetermination Results).
9 See Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. et al. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 15–00103, Slip Op 20–82
(CIT, June 11, 2020).
10 See Timken Co. v United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
11 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
(Diamond Sawblades).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:42 Jun 25, 2020
Jkt 250001
38363
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
held that, pursuant to section 516A of
the Act, Commerce must publish notice
of a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with a Commerce
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision.12 The
CIT’s June 11, 2020 judgment sustaining
the Second Redetermination Results
constitutes a final decision of the CIT
that is not in harmony with Commerce’s
Final Results. This notice is published
in fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken and section
516A of the Act.
by Shanghai Wells during this review,
Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate
such entries at the China-wide entity
rate.15
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final CIT
decision, Commerce is amending its
Final Results with respect to Shanghai
Wells for the POR as follows:
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
Exporter
Shanghai Wells Hanger Co.,
Ltd.13 .......................................
2.26
Assessment Instructions
In the event the CIT’s ruling is not
appealed or, if appealed, upheld by a
final and conclusive court decision,
Commerce intends to instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess antidumping duties on
unliquidated entries of subject
merchandise exported by Shanghai
Wells in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1). Commerce will calculate
importer-specific ad valorem
assessment rates on the basis of the ratio
of the total amount of dumping
calculated for each importer’s examined
sales and the total entered value of those
sales, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1). We will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this
review when the importer-specific ad
valorem assessment rate calculated is
not zero or de minimis. Where an
importer-specific ad valorem
assessment rate is zero or de minimis,14
we will instruct CBP to liquidate the
appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties.
Pursuant to Commerce’s assessment
practice, for entries that were not
reported in the U.S. sales data submitted
12 See
section 516A(c) and (e) of the Act.
Wells consists of Shanghai Wells
Hanger Co., Ltd., and Hong Kong Wells Ltd. See
Final Results, 80 FR at 13333.
14 See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The cash deposit rate for Shanghai
Wells has been superseded by cash
deposit rates calculated in intervening
administrative reviews of the
antidumping duty order on steel wire
garment hangers from China. Thus, we
will not alter Shanghai Wells’ cash
deposit rate as a result of these amended
final results of review.
Notification to Interested Parties
Dated: June 19, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020–13814 Filed 6–25–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
Commerce Spectrum Management
Advisory Committee Meeting
National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice announces a
public meeting of the Commerce
Spectrum Management Advisory
Committee (Committee). The Committee
provides advice to the Assistant
Secretary of Commerce for
Communications and Information and
the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) on
spectrum management policy matters.
DATES: The meeting will be held July 30,
2020, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.,
Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).
ADDRESSES: This meeting will be
conducted in an electronic format and
open to the public via audio
teleconference (866–652–3435
participant code 28570198). Public
comments may be emailed to dreed@
ntia.gov or mailed to Commerce
Spectrum Management Advisory
Committee, National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, 1401 Constitution
SUMMARY:
13 Shanghai
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
E:\FR\FM\26JNN1.SGM
26JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 124 (Friday, June 26, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38362-38363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13814]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-918]
Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
of Review Pursuant to Court Decision; 2012-2013
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 11, 2020, the United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) sustained the final results of redetermination pertaining
to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on steel
wire garment hangers from the People's Republic of China (China)
covering the period of review (POR) October 1, 2012 through September
31, 2013. The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public
that the CIT's final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the
final results of the administrative review, and that Commerce is
amending the final results with respect to Shanghai Wells Hanger Co.,
Ltd. (Shanghai Wells).
DATES: Applicable June 21, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD Operations,
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 13, 2015, Commerce published its Final Results in the
2012-2013 administrative review of steel wire garment hangers from
China.\1\ During the review, Commerce selected Thailand as the primary
surrogate country, finding that data from Thailand provided the best
available information on the record to value Shanghai Wells' reported
factors of production (FOPs). In particular, Commerce found that the
import data (including the surrogate value (SV) for wire rod, the
primary material input FOP) and the labor SV for Thailand were superior
to the SV data available from the Philippines, and the
[[Page 38363]]
Thai financial statements were usable.\2\ Therefore, Commerce selected
Thailand as the primary surrogate country, consistent with section
773(c) of the Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and used the Thai SV
data as the basis for its dumping analysis.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,
2012-2013, 80 FR 13332 (March 13, 2015) (Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM).
\2\ See Final Results, and accompanying IDM at Comments 2 and 3.
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shanghai Wells challenged the Final Results, and, on March 2, 2017,
the CIT remanded that determination to Commerce, questioning Commerce's
decision to rely on ``usable'' Thai financial statements based on a
preference to ``stay within the primary surrogate country,'' because
Commerce must first ``evaluate the available data {sources{time} ,
which includes an acknowledgement that on this record a reasonable mind
would not select the Thai financial statements as better than the
Philippine {financial{time} statements.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Shanghai Wells Hanger Co. v. United States, 211 F. Supp.
3d 1377, 1381 (CIT 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 7, 2017, Commerce issued the First Redetermination
Results,\5\ continuing to select Thailand as the primary surrogate
country and to value all FOPs with data from the primary surrogate
country, in accordance with the established regulatory preference.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand in Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Court
No. 15-00103, CIT Slip Op. 17-24, dated June 7, 2017 (First
Redetermination Results).
\6\ See 19 CFR 351.408(c)(2); see also First Redetermination
Results at 2, 4-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 7, 2020, the CIT granted Commerce's request for a
voluntary remand in order to further examine concerns raised by the CIT
and the parties to this litigation.\7\ In the Second Redetermination
Results, Commerce determined that the Philippine financial statements
on the record were the best available information for valuing the
financial FOPs and recalculated the weighted-average dumping margin for
Shanghai Wells.\8\ On June 11, 2020, the CIT sustained Commerce's
Second Redetermination Results.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Court
No. 15-00103, Order (CIT, February 7, 2020).
\8\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand in Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Court
No. 15-00103 (Second Redetermination Results).
\9\ See Shanghai Wells Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 15-00103, Slip Op 20-82 (CIT, June 11, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\10\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\11\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that,
pursuant to section 516A of the Act, Commerce must publish notice of a
court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Commerce determination
and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court
decision.\12\ The CIT's June 11, 2020 judgment sustaining the Second
Redetermination Results constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is
not in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. This notice is published
in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken and section
516A of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Timken Co. v United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\11\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
\12\ See section 516A(c) and (e) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final CIT decision, Commerce is amending its
Final Results with respect to Shanghai Wells for the POR as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Shanghai Wells consists of Shanghai Wells Hanger Co., Ltd.,
and Hong Kong Wells Ltd. See Final Results, 80 FR at 13333.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shanghai Wells Hanger Co., Ltd.\13\........................ 2.26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Instructions
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed,
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping
duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise exported by
Shanghai Wells in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Commerce will
calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates on the basis of
the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's
examined sales and the total entered value of those sales, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). We will instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review
when the importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate calculated is not
zero or de minimis. Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment
rate is zero or de minimis,\14\ we will instruct CBP to liquidate the
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to Commerce's assessment practice, for entries that were
not reported in the U.S. sales data submitted by Shanghai Wells during
this review, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at
the China-wide entity rate.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The cash deposit rate for Shanghai Wells has been superseded by
cash deposit rates calculated in intervening administrative reviews of
the antidumping duty order on steel wire garment hangers from China.
Thus, we will not alter Shanghai Wells' cash deposit rate as a result
of these amended final results of review.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 19, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-13814 Filed 6-25-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P