Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Results, Notice of Amended Final Results, 40247-40248 [2020-14435]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 129 / Monday, July 6, 2020 / Notices
Dated: June 29, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed
in the Final Decision Memorandum
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by these
investigations consists of certain wind
towers, whether or not tapered, and sections
thereof. Certain wind towers support the
nacelle and rotor blades in a wind turbine
with a minimum rated electrical power
generation capacity in excess of 100 kilowatts
and with a minimum height of 50 meters
measured from the base of the tower to the
bottom of the nacelle (i.e., where the top of
the tower and nacelle are joined) when fully
assembled.
A wind tower section consists of, at a
minimum, multiple steel plates rolled into
cylindrical or conical shapes and welded
together (or otherwise attached) to form a
steel shell, regardless of coating, end-finish,
painting, treatment, or method of
manufacture, and with or without flanges,
doors, or internal or external components
(e.g., flooring/decking, ladders, lifts,
electrical buss boxes, electrical cabling,
conduit, cable harness for nacelle generator,
interior lighting, tool and storage lockers)
attached to the wind tower section. Several
wind tower sections are normally required to
form a completed wind tower.
Wind towers and sections thereof are
included within the scope whether or not
they are joined with non-subject
merchandise, such as nacelles or rotor
blades, and whether or not they have internal
or external components attached to the
subject merchandise.
Specifically excluded from the scope are
nacelles and rotor blades, regardless of
whether they are attached to the wind tower.
Also excluded are any internal or external
components which are not attached to the
wind towers or sections thereof, unless those
components are shipped with the tower
sections.
Further, excluded from the scope of the
antidumping duty investigations are any
products covered by the existing
antidumping duty order on utility scale wind
towers from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam. See Utility Scale Wind Towers from
the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Amended
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 78
FR 11150 (February 15, 2013).
Merchandise covered by these
investigations is currently classified in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS) under subheading
7308.20.0020 or 8502.31.0000. Wind towers
of iron or steel are classified under HTSUS
7308.20.0020 when imported separately as a
tower or tower section(s). Wind towers may
be classified under HTSUS 8502.31.0000
when imported as combination goods with a
wind turbine (i.e., accompanying nacelles
and/or rotor blades). While the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of the investigations
is dispositive.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
04:41 Jul 03, 2020
Jkt 250001
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Investigation
IV. Scope Comments
V. Use of Facts Otherwise Available
VI. Subsidies Valuation Information
VII. Analysis of Programs
VIII. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether Commerce Should
Rely on Facts Available to Determine
Non-Countervailability, Non-Use, and
Benefits of the Programs Under
Investigation in the Absence of the
Government Verifications
Comment 2: Whether the Federal ACCA and
Quebec ACCA for Class 29 Assets Programs
are Specific
Comment 3: Whether the Additional
Depreciation for Class 1 Assets Program
is Specific and Provides a
Countervailable Benefit
Comment 4: Whether the Ontario LCR
Program Provided Countervailable
Subsidies to Marmen during the POI
Comment 5: Whether the Quebec LCR
Program Provided Countervailable
Subsidies to Marmen during the POI
Comment 6: Whether Marmen’s Total Sales
Denominator Should Be Revised to
Reflect Marmen’s Total Sales as
Expressed in Canadian Dollars
Comment 7: Whether Marmen’s Other
Wind—Time-Billed Activities, Repair
Charges, Early Payment Discounts,
Deferred Revenue, Inter-Company
Revenues, and Other Non-Production
Related Income Should Be Included in
Marmen’s Total Sales Denominator
Comment 8: Whether Additional Income
Taxes Paid by Marmen during the POI on
the Previous Year’s GASPE´TC Should Be
Deducted from Marmen’s POI GASPE´TC
Benefit
Comment 9: Tax credit for On-The-Job
Training
IX. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2020–14439 Filed 7–2–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–867]
Large Power Transformers From the
Republic of Korea: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony with Final
Results, Notice of Amended Final
Results
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 26, 2020, the Court
of International Trade (CIT) sustained
the final remand results pertaining to
the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on large power
transformers (LPTs) from the Republic
of Korea (Korea) covering the period
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40247
August 1, 2013 through July 31, 2014.
The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) is notifying the public that
the final judgment in this case is not in
harmony with the final results and
notice of amended final results of the
administrative review and that
Commerce is amending the amended
final results with respect to the
dumping margins assigned to Hyundai
Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. and Hyundai
Corporation USA, and the non-selected
respondent companies ILJIN, ILJIN
Electric Co., Ltd., and LSIS Co., Ltd.
DATES: Applicable June 5, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
K. Drury, AD/CVD Operations, Office
VI, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0195.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 16, 2016, Commerce issued
the Final Results.1 In the Final Results,
Commerce assigned dumping margins of
9.40 percent and 4.07 percent to
Hyosung Corporation (Hyosung) and
Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.
(HHI) and Hyundai, USA (Hyundai
USA) (collectively, Hyundai),
respectively.2 Upon consideration of
various ministerial error allegations,
Commerce issued the Amended Final
Results on May 5, 2016, and calculated
a weighted-average margin of 7.89
percent for Hyosung, and margins of
5.98 percent for ILJIN, ILJIN Electric,
and LSIS.3 Hyosung and Hyundai are
Korean producers/exporters of LPTs and
were mandatory respondents in the
underlying administrative review, while
ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS are
Korean producers/exporters of LPTs
which were not selected for review.
On October 10, 2017, the CIT
remanded various aspects of the Final
Results and Amended Final Results to
Commerce.4 Specifically, the CIT
instructed Commerce to clarify the
1 See Large Power Transformers from the
Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review; 2013–2014, 81 FR
14087 (March 16, 2016) (Final Results) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
2 Commerce also assessed margins of 6.74 percent
on ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd. (ILJIN Electric), ILJIN,
and LSIS Co., Ltd. (LSIS), based on the margins
calculated for Hyosung and Hyundai. See Final
Results.
3 See Large Power Transformers from the
Republic of Korea: Amended Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–
2014, 81 FR 27088 (May 5, 2016) (Amended Final
Results)
4 See ABB INC. v. United States, Slip Op. 17–138
(CIT, October 10, 2017) (Remand Order)
E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM
06JYN1
40248
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 129 / Monday, July 6, 2020 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
treatment of the respondents’ U.S.
commissions based on record evidence,
as well as re-examine whether to cap
Hyundai’s service-related revenues
based on associated expenses.
Pursuant to the Remand Order,
Commerce issued its Final
Redetermination, which addressed the
CIT’s holdings and revised the
weighted-average dumping margins for
Hyosung and Hyundai to 8.74 percent
and 25.51 percent, respectively.5
On November 13, 2018, the CIT
sustained Commerce’s Final
Redetermination with respect to
commissions, but remanded the issue of
service-related revenues to Commerce a
second time.6 Hyosung moved for
partial final judgement on issues
affecting its entries. On August 29, 2019,
the CIT issued the partial final
judgement with regard to issues which
affected Hyosung.7 Commerce issued a
Timken Notice with respect to Hyosung
on October 11, 2019, which established
Hyosung’s final dumping margin at 8.74
percent.8
Pursuant to the second Remand
Order, Commerce again reconsidered its
treatment of service-related revenues
with respect to Hyundai and did not cap
revenue for transactions for which
substantial evidence did not support a
finding that the services were separately
negotiable with third parties.9
Commerce also did not apply its
capping methodology to the delayed
delivery charges associated with two
transactions, and instead made
circumstance of sale (COS) adjustments
to normal value for those delayed
delivery charges.10
On February 19, 2020, the CIT
sustained Commerce’s Second Remand
Results with respect to the revised
capping of certain of Hyundai’s
transactions, but remanded the issue of
the COS adjustment.11 Pursuant to this
third Remand Order, Commerce
5 See Memorandum, ‘‘Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand ABB
INC v. United States Court No. 16–00054, Slip-Op.
17–138 (CIT October 10, 2017),’’ dated February 7,
2018 (Final Redetermination) available at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/remands/17-138.pdf.
6 See ABB, INC. v. United States, Court No. 16–
00054, Slip Op. 18–156 (CIT 2018).
7 See, ABB, INC. v. United States, Court No. 16–
00054 (CIT August 29, 2019).
8 See Large Power Transformers From the
Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony With Final Results, Notice of Amended
Final Results, 84 FR 54843 (October 11, 2019)
9 See Memorandum, ‘‘Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand: ABB
INC v. United States, Consol. Court No. 16–00054,
Slip Op. 18–156 (CIT November 13, 2018)’’ dated
April 26, 2019, (Second Remand Results).
10 Id.
11 See ABB, INC. v. United States, Court No. 16–
00054, Slip Op. 20–21 (CIT 2020).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
04:41 Jul 03, 2020
Jkt 250001
reconsidered its treatment of the COS
adjustments.12 Commerce calculated a
weighted-average dumping margin for
Hyundai of 16.13 percent for the period
of review.13 On May 26, 2020, the CIT
sustained the Third Remand Results.14
LSIS from August 1, 2013 through July
31, 2014, are as follows:
Producer/exporter
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,15 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades 16, the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to
sections 516A(c) and (e) of the Act,
Commerce must publish a notice of a
court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’
with a Department determination and
must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision.
The CIT’s May 26, 2020, judgment
sustaining Commerce’s Third Remand
Results with respect to COS adjustments
constitutes a final decision of the CIT
that is not in harmony with the
Amended Final Results. This notice is
published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, Commerce will continue
the suspension of liquidation of the
subject merchandise at issue pending
expiration of the period to appeal or, if
appealed, pending a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
decision, Commerce is amending the
Amended Final Results with respect to
the dumping margins calculated for
Hyundai and the non-selected
respondent companies ILJIN, ILJIN
Electric, and LSIS. Based on the Third
Remand Results, as affirmed by the CIT,
the revised dumping margins for
Hyundai and ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and
Weightedaverage
margin
(percent)
Hyundai Heavy Industries Co.,
Ltd ...........................................
ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd ................
ILJIN ...........................................
LSIS Co., Ltd ..............................
16.13
17 12.44
12.44
12.44
In the event that the CIT’s rulings are
not appealed or, if appealed, are upheld
by a final and conclusive court decision,
Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to assess
antidumping duties on unliquidated
entries of subject merchandise based on
the revised dumping margins listed
above.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Since the Amended Final Results, the
Department has established a new cash
deposit rate for Hyundai and the nonselected companies.18 Therefore, this
Final Redetermination, and as affirmed
by the CIT, does not change the laterestablished cash deposit rates for
Hyundai, ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 29, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020–14435 Filed 7–2–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
12 See Memorandum, ‘‘Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand: ABB
INC v. United States, Consol. Court No. 16–00054,
Slip Op. 20–21 (CIT February 19, 2020)’’ dated
April 14, 2020, (Third Remand Results).
13 Id.
14 See ABB Inc. v United States and Hyundai
Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. and Hyundai Corporation
USA, Court No. 16–00054, Slip Op. 20–72 (CIT
2020).
15 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), at 341.
16 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 20 10)
(Diamond Sawblades).
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
17 In the Final Results, we explained that ‘‘As we
did not have publicly-ranged U.S. sales volumes for
Hyosung for the period August 1, 2013, through
July 31, 2014, to calculate a weighted average
percentage margin for the non-selected companies
(i.e., ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS) in this review,
the rate applied to the non-selected companies is a
simple-average percentage margin calculated based
on the margins calculated for Hyosung and
Hyundai.’’ See Final Results at 14088, n.11. As
noted above, the revised margin for Hyosung is now
8.74 percent and the revised margin for Hyundai is
16.13 percent. The simple average of these two
numbers is 12.44 percent.
18 See, e.g., Large Power Transformers from the
Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Duty Administrative Review;
2016–2017, 84 FR 16461 (April 19, 2019).
E:\FR\FM\06JYN1.SGM
06JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 129 (Monday, July 6, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40247-40248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14435]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-867]
Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Results, Notice of Amended
Final Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 26, 2020, the Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the final remand results pertaining to the administrative
review of the antidumping duty order on large power transformers (LPTs)
from the Republic of Korea (Korea) covering the period August 1, 2013
through July 31, 2014. The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is
notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in
harmony with the final results and notice of amended final results of
the administrative review and that Commerce is amending the amended
final results with respect to the dumping margins assigned to Hyundai
Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. and Hyundai Corporation USA, and the non-
selected respondent companies ILJIN, ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd., and LSIS
Co., Ltd.
DATES: Applicable June 5, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John K. Drury, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0195.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 16, 2016, Commerce issued the Final Results.\1\ In the
Final Results, Commerce assigned dumping margins of 9.40 percent and
4.07 percent to Hyosung Corporation (Hyosung) and Hyundai Heavy
Industries Co., Ltd. (HHI) and Hyundai, USA (Hyundai USA)
(collectively, Hyundai), respectively.\2\ Upon consideration of various
ministerial error allegations, Commerce issued the Amended Final
Results on May 5, 2016, and calculated a weighted-average margin of
7.89 percent for Hyosung, and margins of 5.98 percent for ILJIN, ILJIN
Electric, and LSIS.\3\ Hyosung and Hyundai are Korean producers/
exporters of LPTs and were mandatory respondents in the underlying
administrative review, while ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS are Korean
producers/exporters of LPTs which were not selected for review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014,
81 FR 14087 (March 16, 2016) (Final Results) and accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum.
\2\ Commerce also assessed margins of 6.74 percent on ILJIN
Electric Co., Ltd. (ILJIN Electric), ILJIN, and LSIS Co., Ltd.
(LSIS), based on the margins calculated for Hyosung and Hyundai. See
Final Results.
\3\ See Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea:
Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review;
2013-2014, 81 FR 27088 (May 5, 2016) (Amended Final Results)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 10, 2017, the CIT remanded various aspects of the Final
Results and Amended Final Results to Commerce.\4\ Specifically, the CIT
instructed Commerce to clarify the
[[Page 40248]]
treatment of the respondents' U.S. commissions based on record
evidence, as well as re-examine whether to cap Hyundai's service-
related revenues based on associated expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See ABB INC. v. United States, Slip Op. 17-138 (CIT, October
10, 2017) (Remand Order)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Remand Order, Commerce issued its Final
Redetermination, which addressed the CIT's holdings and revised the
weighted-average dumping margins for Hyosung and Hyundai to 8.74
percent and 25.51 percent, respectively.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Memorandum, ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand ABB INC v. United States Court No. 16-00054, Slip-
Op. 17-138 (CIT October 10, 2017),'' dated February 7, 2018 (Final
Redetermination) available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/17-138.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 13, 2018, the CIT sustained Commerce's Final
Redetermination with respect to commissions, but remanded the issue of
service-related revenues to Commerce a second time.\6\ Hyosung moved
for partial final judgement on issues affecting its entries. On August
29, 2019, the CIT issued the partial final judgement with regard to
issues which affected Hyosung.\7\ Commerce issued a Timken Notice with
respect to Hyosung on October 11, 2019, which established Hyosung's
final dumping margin at 8.74 percent.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See ABB, INC. v. United States, Court No. 16-00054, Slip Op.
18-156 (CIT 2018).
\7\ See, ABB, INC. v. United States, Court No. 16-00054 (CIT
August 29, 2019).
\8\ See Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results, Notice
of Amended Final Results, 84 FR 54843 (October 11, 2019)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the second Remand Order, Commerce again reconsidered
its treatment of service-related revenues with respect to Hyundai and
did not cap revenue for transactions for which substantial evidence did
not support a finding that the services were separately negotiable with
third parties.\9\ Commerce also did not apply its capping methodology
to the delayed delivery charges associated with two transactions, and
instead made circumstance of sale (COS) adjustments to normal value for
those delayed delivery charges.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Memorandum, ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand: ABB INC v. United States, Consol. Court No. 16-
00054, Slip Op. 18-156 (CIT November 13, 2018)'' dated April 26,
2019, (Second Remand Results).
\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 19, 2020, the CIT sustained Commerce's Second Remand
Results with respect to the revised capping of certain of Hyundai's
transactions, but remanded the issue of the COS adjustment.\11\
Pursuant to this third Remand Order, Commerce reconsidered its
treatment of the COS adjustments.\12\ Commerce calculated a weighted-
average dumping margin for Hyundai of 16.13 percent for the period of
review.\13\ On May 26, 2020, the CIT sustained the Third Remand
Results.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See ABB, INC. v. United States, Court No. 16-00054, Slip
Op. 20-21 (CIT 2020).
\12\ See Memorandum, ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand: ABB INC v. United States, Consol. Court No. 16-
00054, Slip Op. 20-21 (CIT February 19, 2020)'' dated April 14,
2020, (Third Remand Results).
\13\ Id.
\14\ See ABB Inc. v United States and Hyundai Heavy Industries
Co., Ltd. and Hyundai Corporation USA, Court No. 16-00054, Slip Op.
20-72 (CIT 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\15\ as clarified by Diamond Sawblades
\16\, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held
that, pursuant to sections 516A(c) and (e) of the Act, Commerce must
publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a
Department determination and must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's May 26, 2020,
judgment sustaining Commerce's Third Remand Results with respect to COS
adjustments constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in
harmony with the Amended Final Results. This notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly,
Commerce will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject
merchandise at issue pending expiration of the period to appeal or, if
appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken), at 341.
\16\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 20 10) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending
the Amended Final Results with respect to the dumping margins
calculated for Hyundai and the non-selected respondent companies ILJIN,
ILJIN Electric, and LSIS. Based on the Third Remand Results, as
affirmed by the CIT, the revised dumping margins for Hyundai and ILJIN,
ILJIN Electric, and LSIS from August 1, 2013 through July 31, 2014, are
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ In the Final Results, we explained that ``As we did not
have publicly-ranged U.S. sales volumes for Hyosung for the period
August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014, to calculate a weighted
average percentage margin for the non-selected companies (i.e.,
ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS) in this review, the rate applied to
the non-selected companies is a simple-average percentage margin
calculated based on the margins calculated for Hyosung and
Hyundai.'' See Final Results at 14088, n.11. As noted above, the
revised margin for Hyosung is now 8.74 percent and the revised
margin for Hyundai is 16.13 percent. The simple average of these two
numbers is 12.44 percent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Producer/exporter margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd........................... 16.13
ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd..................................... \17\ 12.44
ILJIN....................................................... 12.44
LSIS Co., Ltd............................................... 12.44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event that the CIT's rulings are not appealed or, if
appealed, are upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess antidumping
duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise based on the
revised dumping margins listed above.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Since the Amended Final Results, the Department has established a
new cash deposit rate for Hyundai and the non-selected companies.\18\
Therefore, this Final Redetermination, and as affirmed by the CIT, does
not change the later-established cash deposit rates for Hyundai, ILJIN,
ILJIN Electric, and LSIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See, e.g., Large Power Transformers from the Republic of
Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Duty
Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 84 FR 16461 (April 19, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 29, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-14435 Filed 7-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P