Certain Steel Threaded Rod From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 47174-47176 [2020-16880]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
47174
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 150 / Tuesday, August 4, 2020 / Notices
request must be made in a separate,
standalone submission; under limited
circumstances Commerce will grant
untimely-filed requests for the extension
of time limits. Parties should review
Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78
FR 57790 (September 20, 2013),
available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/201322853.htm, prior to submitting
extension requests or factual
information in this investigation.
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual
information in an AD or CVD
proceeding must certify to the accuracy
and completeness of that information.35
Parties must use the certification
formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).36 Commerce intends to
reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with
the applicable certification
requirements.
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under APO
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305.
Instructions for filing such applications
may be found on the Commerce website
at https://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
Parties wishing to participate in this
investigation should ensure that they
meet the requirements of 19 CFR
351.103(d) (e.g., by filing a letter of
appearance). Note that Commerce has
temporarily modified certain of its
requirements for serving documents
containing business proprietary
information until further notice.37
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: July 28, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The merchandise covered by the scope of
these investigations is seamless carbon and
alloy steel (other than stainless steel) pipes
and redraw hollows, less than or equal to 16
inches (406.4 mm) in nominal outside
diameter, regardless of wall-thickness,
manufacturing process (e.g., hot-finished or
cold-drawn), end finish (e.g., plain end,
beveled end, upset end, threaded, or
threaded and coupled), or surface finish (e.g.,
bare, lacquered or coated). Redraw hollows
are any unfinished carbon or alloy steel
(other than stainless steel) pipe or ‘‘hollow
profiles’’ suitable for cold finishing
operations, such as cold drawing, to meet the
American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) or American Petroleum Institute
(API) specifications referenced below, or
comparable specifications. Specifically
included within the scope are seamless
carbon and alloy steel (other than stainless
steel) standard, line, and pressure pipes
produced to the ASTM A–53, ASTM A–106,
ASTM A–333, ASTM A–334, ASTM A–589,
ASTM A–795, ASTM A–1024, and the API
5L specifications, or comparable
specifications, and meeting the physical
parameters described above, regardless of
application, with the exception of the
exclusions discussed below.
Specifically excluded from the scope of the
investigations are: (1) All pipes meeting
aerospace, hydraulic, and bearing tubing
specifications, including pipe produced to
the ASTM A–822 standard; (2) all pipes
meeting the chemical requirements of ASTM
A–335, whether finished or unfinished; and
(3) unattached couplings. Also excluded from
the scope of the investigations are all
mechanical, boiler, condenser and heat
exchange tubing, except when such products
conform to the dimensional requirements,
i.e., outside diameter and wall thickness, of
ASTM A–53, ASTM A–106 or API 5L
specifications.
Subject seamless standard, line, and
pressure pipe are normally entered under
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS) subheadings 7304.19.1020,
7304.19.1030, 7304.19.1045, 7304.19.1060,
7304.19.5020, 7304.19.5050, 7304.31.6050,
7304.39.0016, 7304.39.0020, 7304.39.0024,
7304.39.0028, 7304.39.0032, 7304.39.0036,
7304.39.0040, 7304.39.0044, 7304.39.0048,
7304.39.0052, 7304.39.0056, 7304.39.0062,
7304.39.0068, 7304.39.0072, 7304.51.5005,
7304.51.5060, 7304.59.6000, 7304.59.8010,
7304.59.8015, 7304.59.8020, 7304.59.8025,
7304.59.8030, 7304.59.8035, 7304.59.8040,
7304.59.8045, 7304.59.8050, 7304.59.8055,
7304.59.8060, 7304.59.8065, and
7304.59.8070. The HTSUS subheadings and
specifications are provided for convenience
and customs purposes; the written
description of the scope is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2020–16918 Filed 8–3–20; 8:45 am]
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
35 See
section 782(b) of the Act.
36 See Certification of Factual Information to
Import Administration During Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July
17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also frequently asked
questions regarding the Final Rule, available at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_
info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
37 See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD
Service Requirements Due to COVID–19; Extension
of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 10, 2020).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:14 Aug 03, 2020
Jkt 250001
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
PO 00000
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–932]
Certain Steel Threaded Rod From the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With
the Final Results of Administrative
Review and Notice of Amended Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 22, 2020, the United
States Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the final results of
redetermination pertaining to the fourth
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on certain steel
threaded rod (steel threaded rod) from
the People’s Republic of China (China)
covering the period of review (POR)
April 1, 2012 through March 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 the dumping margin
calculated for Jiaxing Brother Fastener
Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jiaxing Brother Standard
Parts, Co., Ltd.), IFI & Morgan Ltd., and
RMB Fasteners Ltd. (collectively, the
RMB/IFI Group).
DATES: Applicable August 1, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry
Huang, 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) 482–4047.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On December 3, 2014, Commerce
published its Final Results in the 2012–
2013 administrative review of steel
threaded rod 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 the RMB/IFI Group’s reported
factors of production (FOPs). Commerce
also relied on a ‘‘Doing Business 2014:
Thailand’’ report from the World Bank
1 See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–
2013, 79 FR 71743 (December 3, 2014) (Final
Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (IDM).
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
47175
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 150 / Tuesday, August 4, 2020 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
to derive the RMB/IFI Group’s brokerage
and handling (B&H) costs.
The RMB/IFI Group challenged
several aspects of the Final Results,
including Commerce’s surrogate value
(SV) calculation for B&H costs. In
Jiaxing Brother I,2 the CIT sustained all
other challenged determinations, but
remanded the Final Results to
Commerce to reconsider the calculation
of the B&H SV, finding Commerce’s
calculation unsupported by substantial
evidence. In the First Remand
Redetermination, Commerce revised the
numerator of the B&H SV calculation
downward to account for expenses
associated with obtaining letters of
credit. However, Commerce continued
to rely on 10,000 kilograms (kgs)—
which is the container weight
assumption underlying the World Bank
survey data—as the denominator for the
SV calculation, explaining that the use
of the 10,000 kg figure has been adopted
as the standard methodology across
many cases. Commerce also noted that
using this figure avoids mixing different
sources of data in the calculation of the
B&H SV, which would yield distorted
results.3
On February 3, 2020, the CIT issued
Jiaxing Brother II.4 The Court sustained
Commerce’s determination to adjust the
numerator of the B&H SV calculation in
order to take into account the cost of
acquiring letters of credit.5 With respect
to the denominator, the CIT
acknowledged Commerce’s preference
to use a single source for the B&H
calculation and Commerce’s past
practice in this regard. However, it held
that Commerce must further explain
why using the weight of 10,000 kg as the
denominator is reasonable and
supported by substantial evidence in
light of the RMB/IFI Group’s
information indicating that B&H costs
were not based on the specific weight of
a container.6
In its Second Remand
Redetermination, consistent with
Jiaxing Brother II, Commerce provided
additional explanation regarding the
selection of the 10,000 kg denominator.7
2 See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v.
United States, 380 F. Supp. 3d 1343 (CIT 2019)
(Jiaxing Brother I).
3 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jiaxing
Brother Standard Part Co., Ltd.), IFI & Morgan Ltd.,
and RMB Fasteners Ltd. v. United States, Court No.
14–00316, Slip Op. 19–55 (CIT May 9, 2019), dated
August 27, 2019 (First Remand Redetermination).
4 See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v.
United States, 425 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (CIT 2020)
(Jiaxing Brother II).
5 Id., 425 F. Supp. 3d at 1351.
6 Id., 425 F. Supp. 3d at 1348–51.
7 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:14 Aug 03, 2020
Jkt 250001
Commerce compared the 10,000 kg
figure assumed in the World Bank
report to the alternatives proposed by
the RMB/IFI Group (i.e., the purported
average weight of the RMB/IFI Group’s
shipments or the maximum theoretical
weight of a container) as well as to other
information contained on the
administrative record. Based on this
analysis, Commerce found that the
10,000 kg figure continues to be the best
data available on the record.8 On July
22, 2020, the Court sustained
Commerce’s determination to use the
weight of 10,000 kg as the denominator
for the SV calculation.9
Due to the removal of expenses
associated with obtaining letters of
credit in the B&H SV calculation, we
have revised the RMB/IFI Group’s
weighted-average margin. The RMB/IFI
Group’s weighted-average margin
decreased to 46.78 percent from the
47.62 percent margin calculated in the
Final Results.10
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,11 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,12 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 a 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
July 22, 2020 judgment sustaining the
Second Remand Redetermination
constitutes a final decision of the Court
that is not in harmony with Commerce’s
Final Results. This notice is published
in fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
decision, Commerce is amending the
Final Results with respect to the RMB/
IFI Group. The revised weighted-average
dumping margin for the RMB/IFI Group
for the period April 1, 2012 through
March 31, 2013 is as follows:
States, Court No. 14–00316, Slip Op. 20–13 (CIT
February 3, 2020), dated April 17, 2020 (Second
Remand Redetermination).
8 Id.
9 See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v.
United States, Court No. 14–00316, Slip Op. 20–102
(CIT July 22, 2020) at 13.
10 See First Remand Redetermination at 29.
11 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
12 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
(Diamond Sawblades).
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Exporter
Weightedaverage
margin
(percent)
RMB/IFI Group .....................
46.78
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 the RMB/IFI
Group 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,13
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
by the RMB/IFI Group during this
review, Commerce will instruct CBP to
liquidate such entries at the China-wide
entity rate.14
Cash Deposit Requirements
The cash deposit rate calculated for
the RMB/IFI Group in the 2012–2013
administrative review has been
superseded by a cash deposit rate
calculated in an intervening
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on steel
threaded rod from China.15 Thus, we
will not alter the RMB/IFI Group’s cash
deposit rate.
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.
13 See
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
15 See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015–
2016, 82 FR 51611 (November 7, 2017).
14 See
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
47176
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 150 / Tuesday, August 4, 2020 / Notices
Dated: July 28, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
responses to the supplemental
questionnaires on July 15 and 21, 2020.4
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioner alleges that imports
[FR Doc. 2020–16880 Filed 8–3–20; 8:45 am]
of seamless pipe from the Czech
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
Republic, Korea, Russia, and Ukraine
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
(LTFV) within the meaning of section
International Trade Administration
731 of the Act, and that imports of such
[A–851–804, A–580–909, A–821–826, A–823– products are materially injuring, or
threatening material injury to, the
819]
seamless pipe industry in the United
Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel
States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1)
Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe
of the Act, the Petitions are
From the Czech Republic, the Republic accompanied by information reasonably
of Korea, the Russian Federation, and
available to the petitioner supporting its
Ukraine: Initiation of Less-Than-Fairallegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioner
Value Investigations
filed the Petitions on behalf of the
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
domestic industry, because the
International Trade Administration,
petitioner is an interested party, as
Department of Commerce.
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act.
DATES: Applicable July 28, 2020.
Commerce also finds that the petitioner
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
demonstrated sufficient industry
Allison Hollander at (202) 482–2805
support for the initiation of the
(the Czech Republic); Joshua DeMoss at
requested LTFV investigations.5
(202) 482–3362 (the Republic of Korea
Periods of Investigation
(Korea)); Kathryn Turlo at (202) 482–
Because the Petitions were filed on
3870 (the Russian Federation (Russia));
July 8, 2020, the periods of investigation
Zachary Shaykin at (202) 482–2638
(POI) for these LTFV investigations is
(Ukraine); AD/CVD Operations,
July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020,
Enforcement and Compliance,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).6
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Scope of the Investigations
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
The products covered by these
DC 20230.
investigations are seamless pipe from
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
the Czech Republic, Korea, Russia, and
The Petitions
Ukraine. For a full description of the
scope of these investigations, see the
On July 8, 2020, the Department of
appendix to this notice.
Commerce (Commerce) received
antidumping duty (AD) petitions
Comments on the Scope of the
concerning imports of seamless carbon
Investigations
and alloy steel standard, line, and
On July 13, 2020, Commerce
pressure pipe (seamless pipe) from the
requested further information from the
Czech Republic, Korea, Russia, and
petitioner regarding the proposed scope
Ukraine filed in proper form on behalf
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
the Vallourec Star, LP (the petitioner), a
domestic producer of seamless pipe.1
The Petitions were accompanied by a
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions
concerning imports of seamless pipe
from Korea and Russia.2
On July 13 and 17, 2020, Commerce
requested supplemental information
pertaining to certain aspects of the
Petitions in separate supplemental
questionnaires.3 The petitioner filed
1 See Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duties: Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard,
Line, and Pressure Pipe from the Czech Republic,
the Republic of Korea, Russia, and Ukraine,’’ dated
July 8, 2020 (the Petitions).
2 Id.
3 See Commerce’s Letters, ‘‘Petitions for the
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:14 Aug 03, 2020
Jkt 250001
Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line,
and Pressure Pipe from the Czech Republic, the
Republic of Korea, Russia, and Ukraine and
Countervailing Duties on Imports from the Republic
of Korea and Russia: Supplemental Questions,’’
dated July 13, 2020 (General Issues Supplemental);
and Country-Specific Supplemental Questionnaires:
Czech Republic Supplemental, Korea
Supplemental, Russia Supplemental, and Ukraine
Supplemental, dated July 13, 2020 and Korea
Second Supplemental, dated July 17, 2020.
4 See Petitioner’s Country-Specific Supplemental
Responses, dated July 15, 2020; Korea Second
Supplemental Response, dated July 21, 2020; see
also Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Seamless Carbon and
Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from
the Czech Republic, the Republic of Korea, Russia,
and Ukraine: Response to General Issues
Questionnaire,’’ dated July 15, 2020 (General Issues
Supplement).
5 See infra, section on ‘‘Determination of Industry
Support for the Petitions.’’
6 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to ensure that the scope language in the
Petitions is an accurate reflection of the
products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief.7 On July 15,
2020, the petitioner revised the scope.8
The description of merchandise covered
by these investigations, as described in
the appendix to this notice, reflects
these clarifications.
As discussed in the Preamble to
Commerce’s regulations, we are setting
aside a period for interested parties to
raise issues regarding product coverage
(i.e., scope).9 Commerce will consider
all comments received from interested
parties and, if necessary, will consult
with interested parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary
determinations. If scope comments
include factual information,10 all such
factual information should be limited to
public information. To facilitate
preparation of its questionnaires,
Commerce requests that all interested
parties submit such comments by 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on August 17,
2020, which is 20 calendar days from
the signature date of this notice. Any
rebuttal comments, which may include
factual information, must be filed by
5:00 p.m. ET on August 27, 2020, which
is ten calendar days from the initial
comment deadline.
Commerce requests that any factual
information that parties consider
relevant to the scope of these
investigations be submitted during this
period. However, if a party subsequently
finds that additional factual information
pertaining to the scope of these
investigations may be relevant, the party
may contact Commerce and request
permission to submit the additional
information. All such submissions must
be filed on the records of each of the
concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be
filed electronically via Enforcement and
Compliance’s Antidumping Duty and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS),
unless an exception applies.11 An
7 See
8 See
General Issues Supplemental.
General Issues Supplement at 4 and Exhibit
3.
9 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties,
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)
(Preamble).
10 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual
information’’).
11 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures;
Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR
39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System
Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) for details
of Commerce’s electronic filing requirements,
effective August 5, 2011. Information on help using
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47174-47176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16880]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-932]
Certain Steel Threaded Rod From the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of
Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 22, 2020, the United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) sustained the final results of redetermination pertaining
to the fourth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
certain steel threaded rod (steel threaded rod) from the People's
Republic of China (China) covering the period of review (POR) April 1,
2012 through March 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 the dumping
margin calculated for Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jiaxing
Brother Standard Parts, Co., Ltd.), IFI & Morgan Ltd., and RMB
Fasteners Ltd. (collectively, the RMB/IFI Group).
DATES: Applicable August 1, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Huang, 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) 482-4047.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 3, 2014, Commerce published its Final Results in the
2012-2013 administrative review of steel threaded rod 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 the RMB/IFI Group's reported factors
of production (FOPs). Commerce also relied on a ``Doing Business 2014:
Thailand'' report from the World Bank
[[Page 47175]]
to derive the RMB/IFI Group's brokerage and handling (B&H) costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review;
2012-2013, 79 FR 71743 (December 3, 2014) (Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RMB/IFI Group challenged several aspects of the Final Results,
including Commerce's surrogate value (SV) calculation for B&H costs. In
Jiaxing Brother I,\2\ the CIT sustained all other challenged
determinations, but remanded the Final Results to Commerce to
reconsider the calculation of the B&H SV, finding Commerce's
calculation unsupported by substantial evidence. In the First Remand
Redetermination, Commerce revised the numerator of the B&H SV
calculation downward to account for expenses associated with obtaining
letters of credit. However, Commerce continued to rely on 10,000
kilograms (kgs)--which is the container weight assumption underlying
the World Bank survey data--as the denominator for the SV calculation,
explaining that the use of the 10,000 kg figure has been adopted as the
standard methodology across many cases. Commerce also noted that using
this figure avoids mixing different sources of data in the calculation
of the B&H SV, which would yield distorted results.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United
States, 380 F. Supp. 3d 1343 (CIT 2019) (Jiaxing Brother I).
\3\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Jiaxing
Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jiaxing Brother Standard Part Co.,
Ltd.), IFI & Morgan Ltd., and RMB Fasteners Ltd. v. United States,
Court No. 14-00316, Slip Op. 19-55 (CIT May 9, 2019), dated August
27, 2019 (First Remand Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 3, 2020, the CIT issued Jiaxing Brother II.\4\ The
Court sustained Commerce's determination to adjust the numerator of the
B&H SV calculation in order to take into account the cost of acquiring
letters of credit.\5\ With respect to the denominator, the CIT
acknowledged Commerce's preference to use a single source for the B&H
calculation and Commerce's past practice in this regard. However, it
held that Commerce must further explain why using the weight of 10,000
kg as the denominator is reasonable and supported by substantial
evidence in light of the RMB/IFI Group's information indicating that
B&H costs were not based on the specific weight of a container.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United
States, 425 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (CIT 2020) (Jiaxing Brother II).
\5\ Id., 425 F. Supp. 3d at 1351.
\6\ Id., 425 F. Supp. 3d at 1348-51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its Second Remand Redetermination, consistent with Jiaxing
Brother II, Commerce provided additional explanation regarding the
selection of the 10,000 kg denominator.\7\ Commerce compared the 10,000
kg figure assumed in the World Bank report to the alternatives proposed
by the RMB/IFI Group (i.e., the purported average weight of the RMB/IFI
Group's shipments or the maximum theoretical weight of a container) as
well as to other information contained on the administrative record.
Based on this analysis, Commerce found that the 10,000 kg figure
continues to be the best data available on the record.\8\ On July 22,
2020, the Court sustained Commerce's determination to use the weight of
10,000 kg as the denominator for the SV calculation.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Jiaxing
Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States, Court No. 14-
00316, Slip Op. 20-13 (CIT February 3, 2020), dated April 17, 2020
(Second Remand Redetermination).
\8\ Id.
\9\ See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United
States, Court No. 14-00316, Slip Op. 20-102 (CIT July 22, 2020) at
13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to the removal of expenses associated with obtaining letters of
credit in the B&H SV calculation, we have revised the RMB/IFI Group's
weighted-average margin. The RMB/IFI Group's weighted-average margin
decreased to 46.78 percent from the 47.62 percent margin calculated in
the Final Results.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See First Remand Redetermination at 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\11\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\12\ 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 a 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 July 22, 2020 judgment sustaining the Second Remand
Redetermination constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not
in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. This notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\12\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending
the Final Results with respect to the RMB/IFI Group. The revised
weighted-average dumping margin for the RMB/IFI Group for the period
April 1, 2012 through March 31, 2013 is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Exporter average margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RMB/IFI Group.......................................... 46.78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the
RMB/IFI Group 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,\13\ we will instruct CBP to liquidate the
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 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 the RMB/IFI Group
during this review, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate such
entries at the China-wide entity rate.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The cash deposit rate calculated for the RMB/IFI Group in the 2012-
2013 administrative review has been superseded by a cash deposit rate
calculated in an intervening administrative review of the antidumping
duty order on steel threaded rod from China.\15\ Thus, we will not
alter the RMB/IFI Group's cash deposit rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic
of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review;
2015-2016, 82 FR 51611 (November 7, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
[[Page 47176]]
Dated: July 28, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-16880 Filed 8-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
